sassy_memory_context

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses what it returns and the optional filter, and implies a read-only load. It doesn't mention potential size/cost or whether state is modified, but the provided information is sufficient for a startup context loader.

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?

Three short, front-loaded paragraphs: purpose and contents, explicit usage directive, and parameter clarification. Every sentence earns its place, no redundancy.

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 low-complexity load tool with an output schema present and one optional parameter, the description is complete. It covers what is returned, when to use it, and the optional filter, leaving no critical 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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds meaning by describing 'project' as an optional filter to focus on a specific project. It could be more specific about value format, but the core semantic is clear for a single optional parameter.

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 tool loads full context for session startup and enumerates the exact contents (critical memories, active tasks, blockers, recent milestones, learned patterns). It distinguishes from memory siblings by focusing on startup context rather than individual recall/search.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call at the START of every session, with a rationale. However, it doesn't mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like sassy_memory_recall or sassy_session_start, leaving a small gap.

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