mcp_engram_session_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool validates manifold integrity, initializes epistemic state, binds thermodynamic context, and provides a health check. While somewhat abstract, it gives sufficient behavioral insight for an AI agent.

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 three sentences, each adding crucial information. It is front-loaded with the mandatory nature and action, and there is no extraneous content.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description mentions a health check and validation. It could be improved by noting what the agent receives in return, but for a session start tool, the described initialization and health check are likely sufficient.

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?

The sole parameter 'intent' is described in the schema with a short description. The tool description adds significant context: 'You MUST provide your initial intent or objective for the session. This binds the thermodynamic context.' This goes beyond the schema definition.

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 is mandatory at the start of every conversation or task, and it validates manifold integrity and initializes session state. It is distinct from all sibling tools, none of which start a session.

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 says 'MANDATORY: Call this at the start of every conversation or distinct task' and requires providing intent. This leaves no ambiguity about when to use it.

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