cortex_check_reminders

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

The description implies a read-only operation by stating 'based on real DB state' and returning a list, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or whether it is destructive. Since no annotations are provided, the description should more clearly disclose safety and behavior.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loades the action and output. However, it could benefit from a slightly more structured breakdown of the six checks.

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 the simplicity of the tool (no params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It lacks details on what the six reminder checks are, the format of the returned list, any potential side effects, or when to invoke the tool. More context is needed for complete understanding.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). According to guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as no additional parameter information is needed.

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 runs all 6 reminder checks and returns warnings/blocks. The verb 'Run' is specific and the resource 'reminder checks' is defined. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'cortex_check_contradictions' which also performs checks.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cortex_check_contradictions' or other check tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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