summarize_cluster

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses output components (gist elements) but does not state whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, or requires privileges. The theoretical citation adds context but not behavioral detail.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose. The parenthetical citation is compact and does not detract.

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?

For a simple one-param tool, the description covers intent and output contents but lacks usage guidance, side-effect disclosure, and parameter details. Overall it is minimally viable but has gaps.

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?

The schema only defines memory_ids as an array of strings, with 0% coverage. The description indirectly refers to a 'cluster of related memories' but never explicitly maps the parameter to the cluster. It does not clarify what constitutes a cluster or constraints on IDs.

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 a specific verb ('Summarize') and resource ('a cluster of related memories'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on gist extraction (shared cues, frequent terms, evidence, previews). This is distinct from recall/search tools that retrieve raw memories.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The term 'cluster' implies it is for grouped memories, but no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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