memcp_inspect_context

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It states it returns metadata and preview only, hinting at idempotent read. However, does not disclose error handling, auth, rate limits, or behavior for non-existent contexts, leaving gaps.

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?

Very concise: one-sentence purpose, one-sentence usage guidance, and an Args section. No redundant information; front-loaded and efficient.

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 inspection tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter adequately. Assuming output schema documents return values, completeness is high.

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 0% (no descriptions in schema). The description adds minimal info: 'Context name to inspect'. Lacks format, constraints, or examples, but is adequate for a single string parameter.

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 clearly specifies 'Inspect a stored context' with verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'memcp_get_context' by noting it provides metadata and preview without loading full content.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this to check a context's type, size, and token count before deciding whether to load it into the prompt.' Implies when not to use (when full content needed), but no explicit alternatives named.

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