Load or initialise the persistent session profile

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds important behavior: it creates a default skeleton if no file exists, overwrites when reset=true, and always returns the resolved path. This clarifies that the tool mutates the filesystem only in controlled ways and adds context about the file path behavior beyond annotations.

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 four sentences long, front-loaded with the main action, then adds purpose, edge-case behavior, and a return-field note. Every sentence earns its place without redundant or vague wording.

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 the tool has an output schema and only two optional parameters, the description is quite complete: it covers default path, custom path, default creation, reset behavior, and the resolved path in the return. Minor gaps such as error handling for corrupted files are not critical for this simple tool, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'custom path' and reset=true essentially repeats what the schema parameters already document. It does not add substantive new meaning for the parameters beyond the schema definitions.

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 clearly states the tool reads ~/.tdmcp/session-profile.json and returns a unified JSON snapshot, with specifics about creating a default if absent. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining it caches outputs of four other tools, so the agent can load a session profile without running them.

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 instructs the agent to load it 'at the start of every session' and frames it as a substitute for running style_memory, recall_similar_work, learn_conventions, and learn_from_my_corpus every time. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and a direct comparison to alternatives.

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