get_context

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

Discloses read-only nature (matching readOnlyHint=true), requires RATARY_API_KEY, and states it does not write memories (consistent with destructiveHint=false). No contradictions with 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?

Five sentences, each with distinct value: action, read-only, API key, usage guidelines, alternatives. Front-loaded with main purpose. No fluff.

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, description covers return format ('markdown/JSON context'), auth requirement, and ties to sibling tools. Adequate for agent decision-making.

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 100% with good parameter descriptions. The description adds no significant extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting baseline but not exceeding.

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 it assembles token-efficient ranked context from persistent memories for a coding task, explicitly read-only. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_memory and get_memory by name and purpose.

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?

Provides explicit when to use ('at start of implementation or when answering with organizational memory') and when to prefer alternatives ('Prefer search_memory... Prefer get_memory...').

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