mcp_engram_incremental_spatial_ingest

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It describes incremental behavior, respecting engramignore, updating item1.5 state, and fallback logic. It does not explicitly mention read-only or destructive nature, but the state update is implied.

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 slightly jargon-heavy but packs essential information concisely. It front-loads the key purpose and behavioral details without unnecessary words.

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 and three optional parameters, the description covers default behavior, fallback, file selection mechanism, and respects configuration. It is sufficiently complete for an incremental ingest tool.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds context: max_files default of 10, and paths bypass auto delta, providing meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 performs incremental force ingest of only changed files, using specific mechanisms (mtime, timestamps, watcher events). It distinguishes from the full force ingest sibling by specifying it's incremental and defaults to fewer files.

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 indicates it is called from a 'lean wake-up contract' and defaults to a small number of files, contrasting with the previous full 81-item force. It notes fallback behavior to full force if no last_end or explicit paths, implying when to use this tool over the sibling force_spatial_ingest.

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