list_remembered

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses the return type (list with key, category, size, TTL, preview) and scope (project-level cached entries). It implies read-only behavior without side effects, which is appropriate for a listing tool.

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, no redundant words. The first sentence establishes purpose; the second adds valuable detail about output and usage context. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 list tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the returned fields, purpose, and decision context. It omits default limit behavior and pagination, but overall is adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%; the description does not add further parameter details beyond the schema. It mentions return fields, which indirectly helps understand the category filter, but does not explain defaults or edge cases.

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 lists cached context entries, specifies the returned fields (key, category, size, TTL, preview), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on listing all entries for a project rather than retrieving a specific entry or recalling context.

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 explains when to use the tool: 'so you can decide whether to recall existing context or refresh it.' It implicitly suggests alternatives (recall_context, cache_get) but does not explicitly name them or give when-not guidance.

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