mcp_engram_thought_tile_create_visualization

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto goal linking and creation of 'compresses_path' relations, adding value. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects, or return format, leaving some gaps.

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 plus a key phrase, all front-loaded and each sentence adds value. No wasted 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 no annotations, the description covers main behaviors, usage context, and parameter functions. Lacks detailed output or error info but is adequate for a creation 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%, and the description adds context beyond the schema: 'auto goal linking' for goal_context, 'creates compresses_path relations' for spatial_references, and clarification of payload format. This enriches parameter understanding.

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 the verb 'create' and resource 'rich HTML/compound Visualization Thought Tile'. Distinguishes itself as a companion to thought_tile_create, making its role distinct from siblings.

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 recommends using it as a companion to the main thought_tile_create tool. Provides context on input types (raw HTML or structured payload) but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools.

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