preflight

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It states the tool is fast and cheap, used liberally, and returns relevant prior context. It implies no side effects. However, it does not detail the exact response format or behavior when no context is found.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is four sentences, each valuable. It is front-loaded with an imperative and immediately states the purpose. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose and input usage well but lacks detail on the output format or what happens when no context is found. It is adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces the usage of message by advising to be specific, but adds little new information beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool performs a keyword search to retrieve prior context, including specific examples like previous attempts and decisions. It uses clear verb 'sends' and resource 'topic to fast keyword search', and it distinguishes itself from siblings by being a pre-check tool before making suggestions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly instructs to call this BEFORE making suggestions, recommendations, or action plans, and explains the benefit of avoiding repetition. It does not explicitly compare to alternative tools like recall_memories, but the context strongly implies its specific role.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.