Retrieve the most relevant stored contexts from your local-first memory by entering a query, and get up to 5 ranked entries to inform your next action.
Recall the most relevant stored contexts given a query. Returns up to 5 ranked entries.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | What you are looking for. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return behavior (up to 5 ranked entries) and the retrieval nature, but does not explain ranking criteria, whether it mutates state, or what happens when no contexts match.
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 sentences, no filler, and the key behavior (returns up to 5 ranked entries) is front-loaded. Every word earns its place.
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 one-parameter retrieval tool, the description is mostly complete. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it would benefit from stating ranking criteria or the absence of side effects to fully guide an agent.
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% and the single parameter 'query' is described as 'What you are looking for.' The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, but with full coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 ('Recall') and resource ('stored contexts'), and clarifies it returns ranked entries. It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like record_context, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling it is not.
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 implies usage: given a query, retrieve relevant stored contexts. It does not explicitly state when to use this over record_context, consolidate, or file_anchor, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.