init

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that it creates directory structure and switches session. It does not mention idempotency, overwrite behavior, or failure conditions if the directory already exists. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 four sentences, each providing distinct information: initialization, directory creation, default behavior, and session switching. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the last sentence could be integrated.

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 the tool's low complexity (single optional parameter, simple output schema), the description covers essential aspects: what it creates, default path, and side effect on session. It does not explain output schema details, but that is acceptable as an output schema exists.

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?

There is only one parameter (path) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds context: 'If path is empty, uses the current working directory.' This clarifies the default behavior beyond the schema's 'default' field.

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 uses clear verbs: 'Initialize a local .lilbee/ knowledge base'. It states what it creates (.lilbee/ with subdirectories) and that it switches the MCP session. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'reset' which might reinitialize differently.

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 explains that if path is empty, the current working directory is used. It also mentions that the session switches to the new knowledge base for subsequent calls. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with siblings like 'import_dataset' or 'reset'.

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