project_memory_start

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

No annotations provided, so description must compensate. It states action but lacks detail on side effects, idempotency, or error conditions. For example, whether loading overwrites existing memory is unspecified.

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, front-loaded with action and usage guidance. No superfluous words; every sentence adds value.

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 simple load operation with no output schema, description covers main usage scenarios. Could mention that it initializes memory context, but overall sufficient.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds no additional meaning beyond schema, meeting the baseline but not improving it.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'load' and identifies resource 'compact Obsidian project memory pack'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (close, log, record, status) which serve different purposes.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'at session start, before bug fixes, before feature work, and before project health reviews'. Provides clear context for appropriate invocation.

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