memory_alias_list

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that the operation is a read-only listing and that the entity argument is an optional filter, but it does not describe default limit behavior, ordering, or what an omitted entity returns beyond the implicit unfiltered list. This is adequate for a simple list tool but not richly transparent.

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 front-loaded sentence states the operation and the optional filter with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 simple list tool with no required parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the core invocation concern: what is listed and how it can be filtered. The only real gap is explaining the exact form of a canonical entity value, but the output schema and known domain conventions reduce that burden.

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 must compensate. It adds meaning to the entity parameter by defining it as a canonical-entity filter, but it says nothing about limit, leaving its semantics to be inferred from the schema title and default. Partial compensation keeps this at a middling score.

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 ('List') and resource ('aliases') and immediately states the optional filter ('by canonical entity'), making the tool's role obvious. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like memory_alias_add, which performs a different action on the same resource.

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 when to use the tool—when you need to enumerate aliases—and states the filtering condition, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives such as memory_alias_add or memory_list, nor any exclusions. It is adequate but leaves the usage decision to inference.

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