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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: scoping to user identifier, behavior of omitting key (list all), and pairing with remember/forget. It aligns with annotations and discloses behavioral traits beyond them.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently covers purpose, usage, scoping, and pairing without unnecessary words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers retrieval, listing, scoping, and pairing. Minor gap: does not describe return format or behavior on missing key, but these are typical omissions.

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% and the input schema already documents that omitting the key lists all keys. The description only repeats this information, adding no new parameter semantics 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a value saved via remember or lists all saved keys when key is omitted. It distinguishes from siblings remember and forget, and specifies the resource (saved values) and verb (retrieve/list).

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 advises using recall to look up previously stored context without re-deriving it, and pairs it with remember/forget. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to other sibling tools beyond the memory trio.

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