mureo_strategy_get

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: absent file returns empty markdown (not an error), server_now is the authoritative current date, and raw markdown is returned. It also implies reading (no mutation) through the verb 'Read'. This is rich behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action. Each sentence adds value: return contents, absent-file semantics, when to use, and server_now guidance. No filler.

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 one optional param and no output schema, the description covers the return fields, edge cases (missing file), and time-consistency guidance. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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 schema covers the single optional 'path' parameter 100% with a clear description (defaults, cwd restriction). The tool description does not add further parameter-level details, so the baseline of 3 applies. The slight mismatch between path default mentioning both STRATEGY.md and STATE.json while the description only mentions STRATEGY.md creates minor ambiguity.

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 action ('Read STRATEGY.md') and the precise return payload (raw markdown, exists flag, server_now). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like mureo_state_get and mureo_strategy_set.

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?

It explicitly provides a when-to-use condition: 'Use this when the host has no direct filesystem access'. It also gives handling guidance for absent files and server_now. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, so it falls just short of a 5.

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