Retrieve the resolved result of a meld by providing the meld code and your current owner token. The token rotates on each read, so always use the newest one.
Owner: read the resolved result of your meld. The owner token rotates on every read — use the newest one.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes | The meld code. | |
| owner_token | Yes | Your owner token (from meld_create or the previous read). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses token rotation on every read, which is useful, but does not state whether the read is destructive, whether it consumes the meld, or what the return format looks like. Given the absence of annotations, this is a moderate gap.
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 short sentences with no filler. The purpose is stated upfront, and the critical token-rotation caveat is included immediately, making it efficient and well-structured.
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 read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: ownership, token usage, and the rotation behavior. It lacks explicit mention of return value, but that may be implied by 'read the resolved result'. Overall adequate for a basic operation.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the behavioral detail that the owner token rotates on every read and that the newest one must be used, which goes beyond the schema's static description and clarifies usage.
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 states a clear action ('read') on a specific resource ('resolved result of your meld') and clarifies ownership. It distinguishes from siblings by implying it's for reading after resolution, though it doesn't name alternatives explicitly.
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 a usage hint (owner token rotation) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings like meld_resolve and meld_create. It implies the read step comes after creation/resolution but does not state it directly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.