core_get

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it omits details on error handling (e.g., missing key behavior) and any potential side effects or authorization requirements.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no excess. It could be slightly improved by adding more detail without becoming verbose, but it remains effective.

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 an output schema present, return value explanation is not required. However, the description does not address key-missing errors or whether the output is always full content. It covers the main purpose but leaves minor gaps.

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 0%, but the description merely implies 'key' identifies an entry. It adds no information about key format, constraints, or examples. The parameter name and context provide some meaning, but the description fails to enhance it.

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 verb ('Return'), resource ('core-memory entry'), and scope ('single'). It effectively distinguishes this read operation from sibling tools like core_list (listing) and core_set (modifying).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., core_list for retrieving multiple entries) or what to do if the key does not exist. The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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