Reduce context window pressure by retrieving a compressed briefing and task-relevant fragments. Call when your conversation history grows too large to keep the essential context.
Get compressed briefing + task-scoped relevant fragments. Call when context window pressure hits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | ||
| session_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Input schema / properties / session_idAdded value: +{
+ "minLength": 1,
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "session_id"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description only implies a read-only operation through 'Get'. It does not disclose whether context is modified, compressed, or discarded, nor any side effects.
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 extremely concise, with two short sentences that deliver the core purpose and usage trigger without unnecessary verbosity.
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 description gives a basic idea of the output ('compressed briefing + task-scoped relevant fragments') but lacks parameter details, return format, side effects, and relationship to sibling tools, leaving important context missing.
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 query parameter is not described at all, and session_id is only implied by the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent cannot infer parameter meaning from the description alone.
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 action ('Get') and resource ('compressed briefing + task-scoped relevant fragments'), and the trigger condition differentiates it from ordinary retrieval. However, 'task-scoped relevant fragments' is somewhat vague.
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 provides an explicit trigger ('Call when context window pressure hits'), which is useful, but does not mention alternatives like get_brief or when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.