memory_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits: search algorithm, result ordering, permission requirements, or whether it's a global search. This is a critical gap for a search operation.

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?

Single sentence with no filler. Every word is substantive, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

A search tool with 3 parameters and no output schema requires rich behavioral context. The description omits how results are returned, whether it supports full-text or fuzzy search, pagination, or handling of missing results. Severely incomplete for reliable agent 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions the types of content (conversations, summaries, etc.) that map to the 'kind' enum, but does not explain 'query' semantics, default 'limit' behavior, or allowed values beyond enum. Minimal added value over 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: searching imported Codex conversations, summaries, observations, and memories. It uses specific verbs and resources, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory_remember or memory_recent.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as memory_recent or memory_context. Absence of when-not-to-use or context leaves the agent with no steering.

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