generate_handoff_brief

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description reinforces this with 'No new data is generated' and details the 5-layer compaction process, adding behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 concise (10 lines) with a clear front-loaded purpose. Each section (intent, decisions, etc.) is presented succinctly. No unnecessary information is included, and the structure aids readability.

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 (2 optional params, no output schema) and strong annotations, the description fully covers the behavioral context: what it does, how it works (5-layer compaction), when to use it, and the fact it uses existing data. No gaps remain for an agent to understand the tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already describes both parameters (project_name, token_budget) with defaults and ranges. The description adds context by mentioning the token budget in relation to the compaction hierarchy, but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 generates a surgical context brief for a new AI session, specifying the verb 'generate' and the resource 'handoff brief'. It distinguishes itself from re-explaining context by leveraging existing data, and the 5-layer hierarchy adds specificity.

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?

Explicitly states when to call: 'at the start of a new session or when switching projects'. Also contrasts with re-explaining context, providing an alternative. However, it does not directly compare to sibling tools like recall_memories or get_snapshot, which could serve similar purposes.

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