forget

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: it explains that this is a real delete (not append-only), details cascading effects (ids scrubbed from links, pointers, caches), and notes that forgotten memories cannot resurface. Returns are also described.

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 paragraph that packs all necessary information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Slightly dense but efficiently structured for the complexity.

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?

Given the complexity of a deletion tool with cascading effects, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, behavioral details, and return format. It is fully sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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%, but the description explains both parameters: 'ids' for memory ids to drop, and 'where_contains' for case-insensitive substring deletion. It compensates fully for the missing schema parameter descriptions.

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 that this tool 'TRULY DELETE memories' and is the 'one op that removes content'. It specifies the resource and action, and distinguishes from other append-only operations like supersession.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'for an erasure / right-to-be-forgotten request, a poisoned or false memory, or a hard correction'. It implies when not to use by contrasting with append-only ops, but does not name alternative sibling tools explicitly.

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