loaditout-mcp-server

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden: it discloses the return format ('JSON object with a memories array'), field structure ('key, value, and type'), and edge case behavior ('Returns an empty array if no memories exist'). Minor gap: doesn't mention scope (user-specific vs global) or durability guarantees.

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?

Four sentences with zero waste: purpose, return structure, usage context, and filtering behavior. Information is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema exists, the description adequately explains return values (structure and empty-state behavior). For a single-parameter retrieval tool, the description covers all necessary behavioral and semantic ground.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage, the description adds semantic context by framing the parameter as filtering 'specific categories of memories,' reinforcing the enum's purpose beyond the schema's literal description.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('memories from persistent storage'), clearly distinguishing this read operation from the sibling 'save_memory' write operation. The scope is precisely defined.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('at the start of every session to restore context, installed skills, and user preferences'), providing clear temporal and contextual guidance that differentiates it from general memory queries.

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