mcp_engram_recall_in_file

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

Discloses return of CRS and content snippet, but no annotations exist. Does not explicitly state read-only nature or side effects. Describes behavioral context but not comprehensively.

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, but first is dense with jargon (e.g., 'Spatial recall (enhanced for ritual)', 'AABB coordinates', 'CRS') reducing clarity despite brevity.

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?

Provides return info (CRS, snippet) and use case hint, but lacks explanation of CRS, coordinate system, or how impact analysis works. Adequate for domain experts but not fully self-contained.

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 4 parameters. Description adds no new semantic value beyond the schema, maintaining baseline.

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?

Describes specific verb 'find', resource 'AST concepts', and scope 'in a line range with AABB coordinates'. Distinguishes from siblings like 'mcp_engram_recall' and 'mcp_engram_recall_recent' by specifying file and line range.

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?

Implied usage via 'spatial discipline' and 'low-friction Pre-Edit/Post-Delta impact analysis', but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or when-not-to-use.

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