Recall timeline

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. Discloses complete enumeration (not ranking) and newest-first order, but does not mention return format, default parameter behavior, or read-only nature. Adequate but incomplete.

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?

Two concise sentences plus a short note on optional restriction. Front-loaded with key action and purpose. No 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?

No output schema, so description should describe what the tool returns. It says 'list memory items' but does not specify fields or structure. Could be improved by mentioning typical output fields (e.g., timestamp, content, source). Otherwise acceptable for a simple listing tool.

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% (baseline 3). Description adds default values for days and limit, and clarifies that container_tag is optional with a configured default, adding value beyond schema.

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 exactly what the tool does: list memory items within a recent time window, newest-first, complete enumeration. Distinguishes from sibling recall_search (relevance ranking) and gives example use case.

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?

Explicitly says use for 'what did I do/save in the last N days' questions. Mentions optional source restriction. Implicitly says not to use if you need relevance ranking (use recall_search), but could explicitly mention other siblings.

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