forget

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only hints at 'context-aware forgetting' and 'Shadow Bin support.' It does not describe what gets deleted, whether Shadow Bin makes deletion recoverable, how scope affects behavior, or what side effects occur.

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 short, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. The phrase 'Universal Primitive' wastes space without adding useful guidance, and no structured detail about behavior or parameters is present.

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 six parameters, two enums, defaults, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions, a single-tagline description is far from complete. While an output schema exists, the agent still lacks enough context to understand scopes, layers, the Shadow Bin mechanism, or what 'recent' forgetting with minutes means.

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, but it only loosely maps to shadow_bin and context-awareness. It adds no concrete meaning to key, layer, scope, minutes, or user_id beyond what the parameter names and enum values already imply.

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 identifies the operation as context-aware forgetting with Shadow Bin support, which points to a memory-removal primitive rather than just restating the tool name. However, 'Universal Primitive' is vague branding and does not specify what resource is being forgotten or how this differs from the sibling tools beyond the verb.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus think, dream, evolve, or project. There is no indication of use cases, preconditions, or scenarios where the tool should not be used.

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