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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does not state that forgetting is destructive/permanent, explain what 'preview' does, or clarify how filters interact. The word 'forget' implies removal, but key behavioral details are omitted.

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 one short sentence with the primary action and object front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary detail and is immediately scannable.

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 tool has five optional parameters and no output schema details, but the description does not clarify how filters combine, what happens with no parameters, what preview does, or whether deletion is permanent. An agent would struggle to invoke this safely or correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage)Skip. The description only hints at a single memory vs. a filtered set and doesn't explain memory_id, category, game_id, older_than_days, or preview. 'preview' is especially unclear and never mentioned in the description.

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 a specific verb ('Forget') and clear resource ('memory/memories'), plus a scope boundary ('for the current agent'). It clearly distinguishes from remembering/recalling, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools.

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 gives no guidance about when to choose this tool over siblings like arcade_remember or arcade_recall, nor does it explain how the filtering options should be used. There is no indication of prerequisites, exclusions, or whether preview should be enabled.

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