Rehydrate Aionis Memory

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of explaining side effects, auth needs, or whether this operation is destructive (e.g., overwriting current memory). It only states 'Recover exact archived memory' without elaborating on behavior, which is a significant gap for a memory-altering operation.

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 vague sentence that is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. It fails to front-load critical information about parameter semantics or usage, making it low-value despite its brevity.

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 complexity (generic request object, no annotations, no output schema) and related siblings, the description is insufficient. It lacks details about return values, side effects, and how this tool fits into the memory lifecycle, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 one parameter, 'request,' which is an unconstrained object with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no information about what 'request' should contain, how to structure it, or what fields are expected, leaving the agent in the dark about the required input.

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 the verb 'Recover' and specifies the resource as 'archived memory,' which gives a clear sense of the tool's action. It is distinguishable from siblings like 'remember' and 'forget' at a high level, though it doesn't explicitly compare with them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'aionis_remember' or 'aionis_session_resume.' No prerequisites, context, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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