Memory stats

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

The annotation declares readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which aligns with the description's 'View' action. The description does not add extra context beyond what the annotations provide, but it is consistent and sufficient for a read-only 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that directly conveys the purpose without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and easy to understand.

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 lists the kinds of statistics available, which gives a good sense of what to expect. However, it does not specify the exact output format or whether the result is a single object or a list, but this is a minor gap given the simplicity of the tool.

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?

The input schema is empty, meaning there are no parameters to describe. The description does not need to add parameter details, so this dimension is fully satisfied by the 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 action (View) and the resource (memory system statistics), and lists specific kinds of statistics provided (atom count, type distribution, pending items, persona status). This is unambiguous and does not require additional context.

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 this tool is for viewing memory statistics, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. No sibling tools are mentioned or contrasted, so the guidance is minimal but not misleading.

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