pattern_lookback

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It says 'apply a pattern' but does not clarify whether this is a read or write operation, what side effects exist, or what the output looks like. Output schema exists but is not described.

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 concise with two sentences and front-loaded with the main action. It could be slightly more efficient, but it is well-structured for quick understanding.

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 context of sibling tools and lack of annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose and a use case but falls short on behavioral details. It is adequate for a basic understanding but not fully comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for 'minutes' by explaining the time range. 'pattern_id' is implied as the pattern to apply, but the description does not directly define it. Some value is added beyond the raw 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?

Description clearly states 'Apply a pattern to streams captured in the last N minutes', specifying verb and resource, and adds a usage scenario. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_pattern or update_pattern.

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 a clear use case: 'Useful after creating a new pattern to retroactively scan recent traffic.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, though it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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