get_context_bundle

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

No annotations exist, so description must cover behavior. It specifies the return format and files but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., initialized memory bank), side effects, or error states. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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, 35 words, extremely concise. The first sentence states purpose, the second specifies content and format. No filler.

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 (1 optional param, no output schema), the description lists the exact files returned and indicates a combined JSON. Lacks mention of prerequisites, but sufficient for the its straightforward function.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not discuss the includeEtags parameter or its effect; it relies entirely on the schema. No added value.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves all Memory Bank core files in a single call and lists them explicitly. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_context_digest or get_targeted_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?

Phrase 'for quick context loading' implies the intended scenario, but no explicit comparison with alternatives or conditions when not to use it is provided. Could be improved with direct guidance.

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