echo_decision_matrix

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the tool's purpose but does not explain whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or any side effects. This lack of transparency is a significant gap, especially for a tool that likely performs a lookup.

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 sentence that concisely states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, though it could benefit from slight expansion to cover usage context.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter) and no output schema, the description covers the basic function. However, it lacks detail on the type of output (e.g., list of patterns, single recipe) and context for when to use. It is minimally complete but could be improved.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for the `need` parameter, including examples. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('recommended Echo pattern and recipe'), clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like `echo_get_recipe` (which gets a specific recipe) and `echo_search_docs` (which searches documentation), as this tool provides recommendations based on a need.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `echo_get_recipe` or `echo_list_recipes`. There is no mention of when it is appropriate or inappropriate, leaving the agent without clear context for selection.

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