forget

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses the destructive, irreversible nature of the operation, the soft-delete behavior, the exact ID requirement, operation cost, and return behavior (confirmation or error).

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 thorough and every sentence adds value, but it is relatively long. It could be slightly more compact without losing information, but it remains clear and structured.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description covers all critical aspects: purpose, parameters, behavior, usage constraints, and return values. No gaps.

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 already describes memory_id, but the description adds valuable context: the source of the ID (recall or context results), its format (UUID), and the requirement for exact match.

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 'permanently delete a memory by ID'. It also contrasts with sibling tools like 'context', 'recall', 'remember', and 'share' by being the dedicated deletion tool.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use ('before storing a corrected version of a fact'), when not to use ('bulk cleanup', 'if unsure'), and implied alternatives (e.g., 'remember' for storing, 'recall' for retrieval).

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