get_agent_context

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

With no annotations, the description provides useful behavioral details: expired entries are automatically filtered out, and each entry includes a version field. It does not explicitly state if the operation is read-only or if there are side effects, but as a retrieval tool, the behavior is reasonably clear.

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 concise and well-structured: two sentences for purpose and context, followed by a list of parameters. Every sentence provides value, and the key usage instruction is 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?

Given the tool's purpose (retrieve agent memory), the description adequately covers what it does and how to filter. However, without an output schema, it could provide more detail on the structure of returned memory entries. The mention of a 'version' field is helpful but incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter details. It explains both parameters clearly: printer_name for printer-specific memory, and scope with an example ('global', 'fleet'). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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: 'Retrieve all stored agent memory for context.' It specifies the resource (agent memory) and provides context on when to use it (at the start of a session) and what it contains (printers, materials, past outcomes). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clean_agent_memory or save_agent_note.

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 explicitly guides the agent to call this 'at the start of a session' to recall learned information, which is a clear usage scenario. However, it does not mention alternative tools or cases when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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