retrieve_context

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It explains the traversal-bounding behavior of hops and hub_cutoff, the limitation to reviewed/approved memory, and the exact return shape including approximate token cost. This gives an agent a clear model of what the tool does and what it returns.

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 efficiently front-loaded with the tool's purpose and timing, then progressively explains parameters and output. Every sentence contributes either operational guidance or parameter semantics, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, the description adequately covers what the tool returns ('neighborhood' list and 'approx_tokens'), what inputs matter, and when to invoke it. For a moderate-complexity retrieval tool with three parameters, this is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly without additional context.

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%, so the description must define all parameters, and it does. It gives anchor a semantic definition with a concrete example, explains hops as traversal spread with its default, and clarifies hub_cutoff's role in preventing hub nodes from pulling in the whole graph. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a bounded neighborhood of this team's reviewed, approved memory around a topic.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools, none of which perform memory retrieval, and gives a concrete example of the anchor topic.

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 description explicitly says when to call it: 'Call this once at the start of a session, before starting work,' and explains the purpose ('so you inherit what teammates already learned instead of rediscovering it'). It also implies frequency by saying 'once,' which is direct usage guidance.

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