neotoma_turn_summary

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains what the tool computes and how entities are resolved, but does not disclose whether it is read-only/destructive, nor any side effects or permissions.

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?

Dense but concise; every sentence adds value. The ticket number 'FU-2026-05-002' is slightly extraneous but does not detract significantly. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what the returned status_line and widget_uri are for. Missing explicit return structure and error handling, but adequate for a straightforward compute tool.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: specifies turn_key format, explains conversation_id disambiguation, and notes server entity resolution. Only user_id lacks description in both schema and text, but it's optional.

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 explicitly states the tool computes the per-turn Neotoma status line and optional widget URI, with clear verb-resource pairing. The task is unique among siblings, no ambiguity.

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?

Clearly says when to call 'at the end of every turn after the closing assistant store completes.' Does not explicitly state when not to call, but context is sufficient.

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