logicmem_a2a_sync

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It describes a 'check' operation, implying a read, but does not disclose whether the tool updates a sync state/cursor, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. The behavior around 'last sync' tracking is unaddressed.

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 is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word contributes, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool has four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations; the description fails to explain parameters, return values, or the 'last sync' mechanism. For a tool that likely updates sync state and returns results, the description is incomplete for effective use.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameters. The phrase 'since last sync' hints at since_timestamp, but agent_id and client_id are not explained. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool checks for new shared memories from other agents since last sync, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like logicmem_memory_recall (own memories) or logicmem_a2a_write_shared (writing shared memories).

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 phrase 'since last sync' implies a periodic synchronization use case, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Usage context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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