list_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this is a read operation with no side effects, any rate limits, or required permissions. The description merely restates the schema's core functionality without adding behavioral context.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and key affordances without redundancy. Front-loads the action and resource, followed by the modifiable options.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description provides a sufficient overview for a simple browse operation with filtering and sorting. It covers the essential distinction from sibling tools, though it omits defaults (e.g., sort order default of 'recent') and does not address potential edge cases like empty results.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the description adds only marginal value by labeling the filtering as 'optional' and mentioning sort order. It does not elaborate on the meaning of sort values (e.g., how 'importance' is determined) or default behaviors.

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 uses a specific verb 'Browse' with a clear resource 'stored memories' and highlights optional filtering and sorting, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_memory or memory_summary.

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 usage for casual browsing rather than targeted recall, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_memory (for specific queries) or memory_summary (for aggregation). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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