Retrieve a snapshot of recent conversation turns to resume or analyze context. Set the number of turns to include.
Phase 3: Get current conversation context snapshot for resumption or analysis
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| recentTurnCount | No | Number of recent turns to include |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description's safety burden is low. The description adds context that the tool returns a current snapshot for resumption/analysis, but it does not describe output shape, pagination, or any side effects beyond what annotations already cover.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The 'Phase 3:' prefix is somewhat ambiguous outside a broader workflow, but it does not bloat the description.
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?
For a simple, read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description provides sufficient context for invocation. No output schema is present, but the purpose and resource are clear enough; more detail about what the snapshot contains would be helpful but not strictly necessary.
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%, so the parameter recentTurnCount is already documented in the schema with a default and explanation. The description does not add additional meaning about how the parameter interacts with the snapshot, leaving it at the 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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'current conversation context snapshot,' and adds the intended purpose of resumption or analysis. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but 'snapshot' distinguishes it from history-querying tools like query_conversation_history.
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 phrase 'for resumption or analysis' implies when the tool is useful, and 'Phase 3' hints at a workflow position. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.