roam_recall

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

With no annotations, the description explains key behaviors: it combines data from two sources (page and tags), deduplicates, and optionally filters/sorts. This adds useful context beyond a simple retrieval, though it does not mention safety or side effects (likely read-only).

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. It is concise but could be slightly tighter by removing redundancy with parameter descriptions. 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 moderate complexity (4 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main functionality, data sources, deduplication, and filtering/sorting. It does not explain error handling or prerequisites, but is reasonably complete for an agent to use.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage). The description restates filtering and sorting options, adding no new meaning. It does explain the output structure (deduplicated list), which is slightly helpful but not parameter-specific.

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 stored memories from a specific page or tagged blocks, and returns a combined, deduplicated list. It uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('stored memories'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like roam_fetch_block or roam_search_block_refs.

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 implies this tool is for accessing stored memories, but it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives or when not to use it. No guidance on exclusions or preferred use cases is provided.

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