polarity_observe

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a 'single-fact write' implying mutation but lacks details on side effects (overwrite, append, idempotency). Adds some context about data type but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences plus a list of examples and param details. Concise, well-structured, front-loaded with purpose. No extraneous content.

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 5 parameters, 1 required, enums, no output schema, no annotations, the description covers usage and some params but omits tags and confidence. Return value not described, leaving some gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains source (e.g., 'claude-code') and kind defaults with enum values clarified, but misses tags and confidence parameters. Partial coverage leaves gaps.

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 writes a single fact into the user's personal cosmos graph, and distinguishes it from the sibling tool polarity_capture_turn for whole exchanges. The verb 'write' and resource are specific.

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 provides when-to-use (prefer polarity_capture_turn for whole exchanges, use polarity_observe for one durable observation) and when-not-to (avoid ephemeral chat, own reasoning). Includes concrete examples like user states a hard rule or corrects an assumption.

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