black_souls_memory_read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is safe. The description adds that it reads 'long-term game knowledge', which implies persistence, but it does not detail behavioral traits like return format or performance characteristics. Given annotations carry the safety burden, the description adds moderate value.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Read long-term game knowledge') and includes the key optionality. No wasted words; every element contributes.

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 an output schema exists (not shown) and annotations cover safety, the description is mostly complete for a read operation. However, it could explicitly mention the output format or the scope of 'long-term' (e.g., persists across sessions). The missing category descriptions reduce completeness slightly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The description mentions 'optionally filtered by category' but does not list the enum values or explain what each category (map, npc, etc.) signifies. The schema provides the enum, but the description lacks explanatory value beyond the existence of a filter.

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 states 'Read long-term game knowledge, optionally filtered by category.' This is a specific verb-resource pair that clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like black_souls_memory_write (write) and black_souls_scratchpad_read (short-term memory).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other read-focused siblings (e.g., black_souls_get_variables, black_souls_get_inventory). The description does not mention when not to use or provide context for selecting this over alternatives.

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