dakera_batch_recall

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only listing operation without side effects. It does not mention any destructive actions, but also does not explicitly state read-only or discuss rate limits or auth, so slightly below perfect.

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 very concise, using three short sentences. It front-loads the core function and includes key usage constraints without any fluff. Each sentence adds value.

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?

Provides essential context such as the purpose, the alternative tool, and the filter requirement. However, it lacks details about the return format (no output schema) and does not describe all parameters explicitly, so it is not fully complete.

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 63% (5 of 8 parameters have descriptions). Tags, importance range, and time window are described, but agent_id, session_id, and memory_type lack descriptions. The description mentions filtering by type or session, but does not explicitly map these to the parameters, so agents must infer their meaning.

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?

Clearly states it performs 'filter-based memory listing' with a specific verb and resource. Also differentiates from dakera_recall by explicitly noting the preference when semantic search is not needed.

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?

Provides an explicit condition for choosing this tool over dakera_recall ('when semantic search is not needed') and states the requirement that at least one filter must be provided. This gives clear usage guidance.

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