khwan_cores

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the startup-only read of KHWAN_CORE, the restart requirement, the silent no-op on remote connections, and the /mcp/{core}/{user} path-and-token model. This is exceptional transparency for a list tool.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the bulleted structure makes the connection-mode distinctions easy to scan. The description is longer than average, but every section addresses a real behavioral pitfall or selection rule; only the mild flourish 'The path asks, the token answers' is expendable, and it is not harmful.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, this description is complete: it explains what is listed, how the result is determined, the silent-failure trap, and how to switch brains on remote connections. There are no annotation or output-format gaps that the description would need to fill.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond the schema. The conceptual explanation of cores is useful but is not parameter semantics; the baseline of 4 for a zero-parameter tool applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('isolated cores available on this account') while also defining what a core is. The listing intent is unmistakable and distinct from the sibling tools, which all perform memory-related actions rather than enumeration.

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?

Provides clear context for how the tool's result is determined by connection mode, and gives explicit when-not guidance: on a remote connection, do not advise KHWAN_CORE and instead point the client at a different URL. It does not name sibling alternatives, but none of the siblings are listing tools, so the primary usage ambiguity is well covered.

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