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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds additional behavioral context: 'Scoped to your identifier (anonymous IP, BYO key hash, or account ID).' This informs the agent about data isolation beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Four sentences, each serving a purpose: purpose, usage example, scoping, and tool pairing. No fluff, front-loaded with the most important information.

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 retrieval tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers retrieval behavior, listing mode, scoping, and relationships to sibling tools. It is fully sufficient for an agent to understand and use 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the effect of omitting the key: 'or list all saved keys (omit the key argument).' This clarifies a dual-mode behavior not fully captured by the schema alone.

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?

Description starts with clear verb+resource: 'Retrieve a value previously saved via remember, or list all saved keys (omit the key argument).' It distinguishes from sibling tools 'remember' and 'forget' by naming them and stating the retrieval use case.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use: 'Use to look up context the agent stored earlier... without re-deriving it from scratch.' It mentions pairing with remember and forget, providing clear usage context, though no explicit 'when not to use' is stated.

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