openclaw_doctor_memory_backfillDreamDiary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses mutation ('Mutates') and cost ('expensive in tokens'), but lacks details on specific side effects, authorization requirements, or what exactly gets changed. The description is adequate but lean for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no redundancy, and front-loaded with the primary action. Every word serves a purpose, including the wrapper reference and mutation warning.

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 complexity of backfilling a dream diary and the lack of output schema, the description could explain return values or detailed behavior more thoroughly. While sufficient for experienced users, it leaves some gaps for new agents.

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 only parameter ('instance') is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description need not add much. It does not provide additional context beyond the schema, granting a baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Backfill the dream diary from past sessions') and the resource ('dream diary'), using specific verbs like 'backfill' and 're-runs dreaming on history'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'dreamDiary' and 'dedupeDreamDiary' by focusing on historical backfill.

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 provides guidance on when to use ('re-runs dreaming on history') and warns about cost ('can be expensive in tokens'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools (e.g., 'dreamDiary'), though the cost warning implies careful use.

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