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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description reinforces 'Read-only.' The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail not in annotations: the 100-item page cap and newest-first ordering, which directly affect how the agent iterates. It omits error/permission behavior, so not a 5.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the core operation and packs scope, ordering, page size, and the read-only guarantee without waste.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers ordering, page size, and paging adequately. It stops short of describing the returned memory shape or whether an empty path defaults to root (that only lives in the schema default), so it is strong but not fully self-contained.

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 67% and the two documented params (offset, workspace_id) are handled by the schema. The description adds meaning for the path parameter (workspace-relative, memories 'saved under' it) and reinforces the offset/paging contract, going beyond the bare schema for the undocumented path field.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (memories) scoped to a workspace-relative path within the connected Pathrule workspace. The scope and ordering (newest first) clearly distinguish it from siblings like pathrule_read_memory and pathrule_history_memory.

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?

Gives concrete usage context: 'at most 100 per call; pass offset for the next page,' which tells the agent how to page. However, it never names an alternative or an exclusion condition relative to read_memory/history_memory, so the when-to-use guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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