mempalace_diary_read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safe read-only nature. The description adds little behavioral detail beyond this—'hard-filtered' is already present in the schema descriptions, and 'recent' is also in the schema. No new behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 succinct sentences that front-load the verb and object. The first sentence states the core action, and the second provides a use case. No fluff or repetition.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema present, the description is sufficiently complete for a read tool. It gives the primary use case and mentions optional filters. It could clarify ordering or default count, but last_n in the schema already defines a maximum.

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 all four parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description repeats 'hard-filtered' and 'recent' without adding any syntax, defaults, or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Read') and resource ('recent diary entries for an agent'), with optional filters. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like diary_write, diary_search, and diary_reindex by focusing on reading recent entries.

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?

The phrase 'Use this for recent session continuity' provides a clear context for when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top score, but the guidance is more than implied.

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