Initialize MIMRY metadata for a repository root, setting up local memory structures and optional graph data so AI coding agents can build and query repository context.
Initialize MIMRY metadata for a root.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| root | No | ||
| root_type | No | repo | |
| skip_graph | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state whether initialization is destructive, idempotent, requires specific permissions, or what happens if metadata already exists. This is a significant gap for an initialization operation.
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, efficient sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded with the main action, though it may be too terse given the complexity of the tool.
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 tool with 3 parameters (0% documented), no annotations, and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain parameter usage, behavioral characteristics, or when to use this tool over siblings, leaving critical gaps.
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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters—root, root_type, or skip_graph. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names themselves, leaving the agent to guess their semantics.
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 states a specific verb (Initialize) and resource (MIMRY metadata for a root), which is clearer than a tautology. However, 'MIMRY' is undefined and no sibling differentiation is provided, leaving the purpose vague to an agent unfamiliar with the system.
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 offers no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no comparison to sibling tools like mimry_status or mimry_reindex. An agent has no guidance on when initialization is required versus other operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.