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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: scoping ('Scoped to your identifier...') and the list-all-keys behavior when key is omitted. It does not contradict any annotations, and these extras help the agent understand visibility and behavior.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful. It opens with the core action, gives practical examples, and closes with scoping and sibling relationships. No wasted words or redundant restatement of schema.

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, single-parameter tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, use case, scoping, and alternatives. No critical gaps for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'key', and its description already states 'Memory key to retrieve (omit to list all keys)'. The tool description reinforces this but adds no substantial new meaning beyond the schema. 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 states 'Retrieve a value previously saved via remember, or list all saved keys' — a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly naming remember and forget as paired tools. No ambiguity about its function.

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?

It provides an explicit use case: 'Use to look up context the agent stored earlier' with concrete examples like ticker, address, and research notes. It also tells when to use alternatives: 'Pair with remember to save, forget to delete.' This gives clear when-to-use guidance and names sibling tools.

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