memory_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Search' but does not clarify if the operation is read-only, any side effects (e.g., logging), authorization needs, or rate limits. The agent cannot determine the safety profile from this description alone.

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 front-loads the purpose. However, it is too brief to provide usage context, and additional sentences could improve clarity without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema and no required parameters, the description does not explain the search behavior, result format, or how query/scope/scope_id affect results. It lacks completeness for a search tool in a complex ecosystem with many sibling tools.

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 has 100% coverage, providing descriptions for all four parameters (limit, query, scope, scope_id). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3. It does not explain how parameters interact or provide usage examples.

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 identifies the tool as a 'Search' operation on the 'memory store' in AI Team OS. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory_add, memory_list, and memory_invalidate. However, it lacks comparison to other search tools like ecosystem_search, which may cause confusion.

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 zero guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned. It does not reference sibling tools like memory_list or ecosystem_search to help the agent choose correctly.

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