cortex_insights

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description adds that insights are 'auto-generated' and requires an Enterprise tier, which provides some behavioral context. However, it does not disclose any error conditions, pagination behavior, or performance characteristics beyond the default limit.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences plus a structured 'Args' and 'Returns' section. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded. No redundant or wasteful wording.

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 list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality, return format, and access requirement. It does not discuss error handling or limits beyond the default, but given the low complexity, this is adequate.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explicitly documents the sole parameter 'limit' with its purpose ('Maximum insights to return') and default value (20), adding significant meaning beyond the raw schema. This compensates well for the schema gap.

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 'List auto-generated memory insights', specifying the verb 'List' and the resource 'auto-generated memory insights'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_memories' which list user memories, and 'recall' which queries memories. The 'auto-generated' qualifier adds precision.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires Enterprise tier or Novyx Cloud') but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_memories' or 'recall'. There is no explicit statement of context or exclusions, making it insufficient for an agent to decide between related tools.

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