get_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return size (~300 chars) and implies a safe, side-effect-free read operation. However, it doesn't explicitly state that it's read-only or other behavioral details.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the purpose, and the second provides usage guidance. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 simple with one parameter, no output schema, and the description provides approximate output length and usage context. It references a sibling for complete text, making it complete for its low complexity.

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%, with the 'id' parameter described as 'UUID of the marsvault_chunks row' in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond 'by ID', so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 it fetches a medium-length excerpt (~300 chars) of a long-term memory chunk by ID, using a specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'excerpt'. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_full'.

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 says to use 'after recall when a preview match looks relevant' and provides a clear alternative: 'For complete text, call get_full.' This guides when to use and when not to.

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