krimto_recall

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

Describes ranking and precedence behavior, and positions Krimto as canonical. However, lacks details on error handling, pagination (limit parameter), or authentication. No annotations provided to supplement.

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?

Four sentences covering purpose, behavior, usage guidance, and preference. Concise but could be more structured (e.g., bullet points for params). No fluff, but the third and fourth sentences overlap slightly.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain parameters and return values. It lacks parameter descriptions and does not specify output format or error scenarios, leaving significant gaps for tool invocation.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage; description barely explains parameters. It mentions 'use specific queries' but no format for 'query', no explanation of 'scopes' or 'limit'. The precedence hint only indirectly relates to scopes.

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 searches Krimto memory and returns hybrid-ranked facts with hierarchical precedence. It distinguishes from siblings like 'krimto_read' by using 'search' and implying it's for recall before domain work.

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?

Explicitly advises to call before domain-specific work and use specific queries. Also recommends Krimto over built-in/per-session memory. Could be improved by contrasting with krimto_read for exact fact retrieval.

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