statewave_compile_subject

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: triggers a compile job, returns a summary, is a no-op by default, and the effect of the force parameter. It covers all important behavioral aspects.

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 three sentences, each essential: first defines the tool, second distinguishes from siblings, third explains behavior and usage. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fully complete. It explains the return value (summary with subject and status) and provides all necessary context for correct invocation.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the default no-op behavior for the force parameter and the subject format, going 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 compiles raw episodes into durable, retrievable memories, and distinguishes it from siblings like statewave_ingest_episode (stores raw) and statewave_search_memories (reads compiled). It uses specific verbs and resource terms.

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 explicitly advises calling it right after ingesting episodes to make them retrievable. It also explains the default no-op behavior and when to use the force parameter. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions but provides clear context.

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