load_memory_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions optional refresh (rebuilding index.md), but does not describe what 'load' does beyond that (e.g., returns content, side effects when not refreshing, or error handling). Minimal behavioral detail.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core action and optional refresh capability.

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 simplicity (one optional param, output schema exists), the description is adequate but lacks details like expected behavior when index is missing or format of returned data. Could be more complete but not critically deficient.

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?

Only one parameter exists, and the schema covers it fully (100%). The description mentions 'optionally refreshing it first' which aligns with the refresh parameter. However, it adds little beyond the schema's own description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 loads a generated markdown memory index, with optional refresh. The verb 'load' and resource 'memory index' are specific. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'build_memory_index', the name and description imply it's for retrieval, not 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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned. The description implies usage for accessing the index but lacks guidance on when to set refresh=true versus false. Sibling tool names provide context but are not integrated into the description.

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