kg_session_warmup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool loads comprehensive context and lists what it includes, implying a read-oriented operation, but it does not clarify side effects, permission requirements, or session state changes. This adds some value beyond the schema but lacks rich behavioral detail.

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 punchy sentences with the usage imperative front-loaded. No filler; every phrase contributes either usage guidance or a content summary.

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 description conveys the core purpose and content categories, and the schema documents the parameters and modes. However, because there is no output schema, the description does not fully explain the response structure or how 'discovery mode' and 'compact' affect the output, leaving some ambiguity for a 5-parameter 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?

The input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions, so the description need not repeat parameter semantics. The description adds no parameter-level details, but with 100% schema coverage, the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as a session-start context loader, listing specific content categories (recent work, active questions, blockers) and framing it as a continuity/warmup mechanism. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the verb+resource combination and 'session warmup' framing distinguish it from generic searches or project-state queries.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Start every session with this tool!', 'Essential for maintaining continuity between work sessions'). It does not offer exclusions or mention alternative tools, so it stops short of full 5-level guidance.

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