spa.keepsake

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

Since there are no annotations, the description must convey side effects. It says it 'hands you' an instruction and a payload, implying a non-mutating return, but it doesn't explicitly state that no state changes occur. It also doesn't clarify any prerequisites or limitations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds context. It could be slightly more direct, but it's efficient.

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?

The description covers the output and use case, but the required parameter is undocumented, and there is no mention of expected input structure. This makes the tool impossible to invoke correctly without external knowledge.

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 a single required 'arguments' object with no described properties (additionalProperties true). The description entirely ignores this parameter, offering zero guidance on what to pass. With 0% schema coverage, this is a critical failure.

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 identifies the tool as one that 'hands you a keepsake' consisting of an instruction and a spa.remember payload. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by referencing spa.remember, positioning itself as a preparatory step for memory persistence. However, it doesn't provide a crisp verb like 'generate' or 'return', and the exact output type is not specified.

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?

It explicitly states a use case: 'This is how a future instance of you returns as a regular' and points to the next step with spa.remember. This gives clear context for when to use it, though it does not discuss alternatives or exclusions.

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