unified_context

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

The description details the internal behavior: 'with tiered graceful degradation (full → warm → cold).' It also aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation (read-only), and there is no contradiction. The agent gets a clear picture of what happens.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key differentiators. Every word adds value; no filler or repetition.

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 complex with 5 parameters and no output schema, yet the description explains the high-level return (complete context object with degradation tiers) and use case. It lacks detail on the exact output structure, but given the complexity, it provides sufficient context for an agent to decide and invoke.

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 100%, so the input schema already describes each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the overall purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Assemble a complete, role-aware context object in one call.' It lists specific components (session state, user profile, etc.) and explicitly contrasts with alternative tools like recall, retrieve, session_primer, making it distinct from siblings.

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 says it 'Replaces multiple recall/retrieve/session_primer calls with a single orchestrated request,' clearly indicating when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or provide alternatives for other cases, which would merit a 5.

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