Check rumination

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

Adds 'Stateless' and 'returns a structured advisory signal' beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint). No contradiction with annotations. Could mention return format or side effects but sufficient given 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and key traits. Could add parameter detail without excessive length.

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?

With 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema, description omits parameter meanings and output structure. Incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly without further inference.

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%, yet description only hints at current_prompt and history. No details on window_minutes, threshold_count, similarity_threshold, which are critical for usage. Fails to compensate for schema 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?

Description clearly states verb 'Detect' and resource 'semantic repeat of recent prompts'. Distinguishes from sibling tools which target different behavioral checks (hyperfocus, sycophancy, tone).

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?

Implies usage for detecting rumination but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like check_hyperfocus or check_sycophancy. Lacks when-not or exclusion criteria.

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