mneme_prime

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the injection format ('full'), progressive format selection, per-session deduplication, and token budgeting. However, it does not mention safety or side effects; as a read-only context fetch, this is acceptable but could be more explicit.

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 a single paragraph of three sentences. It includes forward-looking version details ('v1.0 uses...Phase F.5 adds...') which may be unnecessary for the immediate AI agent use. The core purpose is front-loaded, but the version info adds clutter.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview but lacks details on return format, pagination, or error cases. It explains the adaptive layer and progressive format, but missing output schema leaves agents needing to infer behavior.

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 only 20% (session_id only). The description adds meaning for session_id (purpose, activation of features) but does not explain task_description, budget_tokens, recent_session_count, or topic_doc_count beyond the schema defaults. It hints at 'token budget' and 'topic-relevant matches', but lacks full compensation for the low 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 the tool's purpose: 'Preflight context bundle for a new session.' It specifies what it combines (session-typed docs and topic-relevant matches) and mentions a token budget. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mneme_recall (retrieval) and mneme_write (creation).

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 implies when to use this tool (new session startup) and mentions passing session_id to activate deduplication and format selection. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the context of 'preflight' and sibling names provide implied guidance.

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