Delete Memory

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false, and idempotentHint: true, so the behavioral safety profile is covered by structured metadata. The description itself adds no extra behavioral detail about permanence, error behavior, or side effects, but it also does not contradict the annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It names the operation, target, and parameters compactly, earning its place without redundancy.

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 two-parameter destructive operation with useful annotations already present, the description is largely complete. It could mention what the tool returns or what happens when the memory does not exist, but the simplicity of the operation makes the absence a minor gap rather than a significant one.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both parameters adequately: id is a UUID and type is an enum of project/preference/learning. The description repeats the 'type and ID' concept but contributes little beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('memory') and identifies the exact identifier needed: type and ID. It clearly stands apart from the sibling save/get/search/list tools, which are all non-destructive operations.

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 intended use is clear: call this when a specific memory should be removed using its type and ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the delete action is unambiguous enough that an agent can readily infer when to invoke it.

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