project_memory

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

Discloses that decisions/gotchas require prior user distillation while TODOs are always available, and mentions coverage counts. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral info.

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?

Four concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, parameter usage, timing advice, and content availability. No fluff.

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?

Covers what the tool returns (decisions, gotchas, TODOs, coverage counts) but lacks specifics on the return format, which could be inferred from context but is not explicitly stated.

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?

The single parameter is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), and the description adds no additional information beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 retrieves a project's durable memory including decisions, gotchas, and TODOs with coverage counts, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on individual components.

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 recommends calling at the start of work and explains when to omit the project parameter, but does not directly compare with sibling tools or specify when not to use it.

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