rememb_diff

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the burden; it does declare the operation safe and read-only, which is the key behavioral fact. However, it says nothing about what happens with invalid/unknown versions, whether from_version must be older, or error behavior when entry_id does not exist.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and return format, plus a safety qualifier. No filler and nothing is buried.

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 description names the output format ('unified diff') and safety profile, which is the core an agent needs; with no output schema, 'unified diff' covers the return shape. Still, for a tool with required version parameters and no annotations, edge cases and the version-ordering contract are left unstated.

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% with all four parameters documented, including enum and defaults, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the relational constraint that both versions must belong to the same entry; nothing about ordering, store scoping, or valid ranges beyond what the schema already says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (show a unified diff between two revisions of an entry) and names the return format. It implicitly distinguishes itself from rememb_get (full entry) and rememb_versions (version listing), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by 'two revisions of the same entry', which suggests fetching a diff after inspecting versions, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or reference to rememb_versions or rememb_get as alternatives.

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