mcp_engram_promote_hot

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the effects: LegView, backend hot cache, and explicit hot_set. Also mentions same mechanism as ki_hijacker promote_tile_to_high_priority. Could mention idempotency or side effects, but still good.

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. First states action and target, second states when to use and cross-reference. 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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, description adequately covers purpose, usage, and parameter semantics. Missing mention of response or verification, but not critical.

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 100% with examples (tile:..., helper:...). Description adds context by linking to usage timing (e.g., Thought Tiles, helpers), reinforcing parameter meaning.

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?

Clearly states verb (promote) and resource (concept to high-priority hot path), with specific LegView/backend cache/hot_set targets. Gives use cases but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'mcp_engram_promote_hot_batch' or 'mcp_engram_pin'.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios (after creating high-value Thought Tiles, ritual anchors, helpers, before session_end/compression). However, no information on when not to use or alternatives.

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