Inspect Memory Space Telemetry

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces with 'Read-only with no side effects.' It adds value by declaring the tool performs an 'audit' with real-time telemetry, which signals a non-mutating inspection. No contradiction.

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: the first lists the tool's outputs and actions, the second gives use cases and safety. No filler 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?

Tool is simple with one optional parameter, has an output schema (so return values are already documented), and annotations cover read-only safety. Description covers health monitoring and verification cases, which is complete for this scope.

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% for the single optional parameter. The description mentions 'defaults to caller default space' which echoes schema, but does not add new detail beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema fully documents the param.

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 names a specific verb ('Audits and retrieves') on a specific resource ('partitioned memory space'), and lists specific telemetry items ('active node count, total synapses, grounded facts count, memory state, and contradiction alarms'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings which focus on recall, search, and session 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?

States when to use: 'monitor memory health, verify ingestion, or inspect space capacity.' Does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use, but the use cases are clear given sibling tools have distinct functions.

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