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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description goes beyond by explaining that retrieval is free, the returned blob is encrypted and only the owner can decrypt, and details possible errors (expired, at-rest key unavailable). This adds significant behavioral context not captured by annotations alone. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise but includes a structured output format. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and then details. Slightly dense but still efficient.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description explains the return values and error conditions comprehensively. It covers retrieval cost, encryption, ownership, and error states, making it complete for a retrieval tool with rich annotations.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining that ticket is from memory_save and that api_key must match the one used for saving. It also provides context about owner verification, which enhances the schema descriptions.

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 action ('Load a memory'), the resource ('memory from earlier session'), and provides a specific verb ('load'). It differentiates from siblings like memory_save by mentioning retrieval of previously saved data. The return format is also specified, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you saved a memory in an earlier session') and notes that retrieval is free, implying cost considerations. It doesn't explicitly say when not to use but the context with sibling memory_save makes it clear. The description also covers error states, providing good guidance on expected outcomes.

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