recall

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds that the search uses multiple strategies (vector, FTS5, keyword), which gives some behavioral context, but does not explain how results are combined or any performance implications. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise at 9 words, clearly stating the tool's action and methodology. It is front-loaded with the key purpose and contains no unnecessary 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?

The description does not cover the return format or the behavior of the multi-strategy search. For a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks completeness by not explaining how the search results are combined or ordered, nor what the 'deep' parameter entails beyond the schema. The agent may need additional documentation to use effectively.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the schema, providing full coverage. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: to recall memories using multiple search strategies (vector, FTS5, keyword). This distinguishes it from simpler recall tools like 'list_memories' but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'recall_with_context' which is a direct sibling.

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 its sibling tools such as 'recall_with_context', 'list_memories', or 'store'. The agent must infer usage from the name and brief description alone.

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