episodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and delivers: chronological ordering, oldest-first, no ranking, all-body scope, and boot-time injection. It omits return format/pagination, but for a read-only log query that is a minor gap.

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 with front-loaded core definition and behavioral traits, followed by practical use cases. The metaphor is slightly ornate but each sentence earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough to select and invoke it: what it returns, ordering, scope, and typical timing. It lacks explicit alternative routing but is not seriously incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'hours', including default and minimum. The description restates the 'last N hours' concept but adds no new semantic detail beyond the 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?

The description clearly identifies a specific resource ('episode tape') and its content: events across all bodies of this identity within a time window, time-ordered oldest-first. It also distinguishes itself from ranked/similarity-based sibling tools by explicitly stating 'never ranked.'

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?

It provides explicit, practical contexts for use: mid-session catch-up on other sleeves and a nightly indexing pass. It doesn't name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the usage guidance is clear enough.

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