mnemosyne_get_position

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the safety/behavior burden. It does disclose that the value is a 'last known' position saved by an agent or cockpit, implying it may be stale or persisted, but it does not explicitly state that the call is read-only or describe behavior when no position exists.

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, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The first sentence states what the tool returns, and the second gives the primary use case. Every word earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned ('phase and description') and when to use it. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning behavior if no saved position exists, but the core guidance is sufficient.

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 schema description coverage is 100% and the resonance_id parameter is already documented with examples. The tool description does not add further parameter-level nuance beyond reinforcing that the id is for a specific Resonance, so the schema is doing the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get') and resource ('current position of a specific Resonance'), and clarifies the meaning of 'position' as 'the last known phase and description saved by an agent or the cockpit.' This makes it easy to distinguish from siblings like mnemosyne_update_position and mnemosyne_resonances.

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 gives explicit context: 'Use this at the start of a session to know exactly where work left off.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the stated use-case is clear enough to guide selection.

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