nape_honks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states what the tool returns and mentions honk types, but does not indicate side effects, authorization needs, or response behavior. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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 three sentences, front-loading the action and honk types. It is concise without fluff, though it could be slightly more structured with separate usage guidelines.

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 tool is simple but lacks an output schema. The description fails to specify return format, sorting, or what 'recent' means. It does not cover pagination or limit behavior, leaving gaps for proper 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (only session_id described). The description repeats the schema's hint about omitting session_id but adds no new meaning for the limit parameter, which remains undocumented. The description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 it returns recent unacknowledged Nape honks, explains what honks are (drift-pattern detections with four subtypes), and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tool nape_honks_with_history by specifying 'unacknowledged'.

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 gives one usage hint: 'Omit session_id to see honks from all sessions.' However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool vs siblings like nape_honks_with_history or nape_observe, nor does it mention prerequisites or context.

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