memorybank_get_project_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not mention whether the tool is read-only, what happens if projectId is invalid, or any side effects. The description only lists document types and usage context, leaving the agent unaware of potential errors or auth requirements.

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 well-structured with bullet points and clear sections. It is reasonably concise but includes some repetition (e.g., listing document types both in text and as a list). Overall, it is efficient 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description does not explain the structure of the returned markdown documents or what 'full' vs 'summary' entails in terms of output format. The description covers purpose and usage well but could be more specific about the return value to complete the context.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining each document type (e.g., 'projectBrief: Descripción general del proyecto') beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It also reinforces that projectId is mandatory, though that is redundant with the schema.

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 retrieves project documentation generated by AI, lists the document types (projectBrief, productContext, etc.), and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool memorybank_search by positioning it as providing high-level context versus semantic search. The verb 'Lee' and the resource 'documentación del proyecto' are specific.

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 says 'Usa esta herramienta al inicio de cada sesión' (use at the start of each session) and contrasts it with memorybank_search, which is for precise semantic search. This provides clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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