mneme_recall

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Retrieve'), but it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive, idempotent, or requires certain permissions. The description is functional but lacks explicit behavioral context.

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: first states the core functionality and filter options, second lists returned fields. It is front-loaded, concise, and avoids unnecessary details—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?

The tool has 5 parameters with no output schema and no annotations. The description covers the filtering logic and return fields but omits details like top_n default, whether date ranges are inclusive, how session_id and dates interact, and the exact structure of the returned data. This leaves ambiguity for the AI agent.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by session_id or date range' and the return fields, but does not explain each parameter's purpose, constraints (e.g., top_n defaults to 10, max 50), or whether parameters are optional/required. The description adds some value but is insufficient for a 5-parameter tool.

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 retrieves documents filtered by session_id or date range, and specifies the returned fields (paths, titles, mtimes, optional body). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mneme_search (likely full-text) and mneme_write (obviously writing).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mneme_search or mneme_timeline. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or cases where the tool should not be used. For example, it is unclear whether session_id and date range can be combined.

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