mnemosyne_about

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and largely meets it: it discloses that this is a read action returning a briefing identical to connect-time server instructions. It also gives the agent a clear mental model of the content, though it does not specify the exact return format or whether any auth is required.

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 no wasted words: the first front-loads what the tool reveals, the second explains when to use it. Every clause adds value.

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 zero-parameter informational tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what the briefing covers, that it repeats connect-time instructions, and when to invoke it. An agent can decide to call and know what to expect.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is fully covered, so there is no parameter information for the description to add. Baseline 4 applies because nothing is missing for invocation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and names a clear resource: Mnemosyne OS's identity and the operational rules an agent must honor. It enumerates the content areas (governance, vault protection, spine model, do/don't behavior), making it unambiguous and distinct from the operational sibling tools.

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 states exactly when to call: to re-read the briefing or when the client did not surface the server instructions. Since this is the only informational tool among the siblings, no alternative routing is required; the condition is explicit and actionable.

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