Search Memory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of 'search' and 'ranked' adds minimal behavioral context. The description does not contradict annotations, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond what the annotations imply.

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 concise at one sentence, but it is too sparse. It sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it incomplete. A well-structured description should front-load the purpose but also include essential parameter context, which is missing.

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 presence of an output schema and many siblings, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the return format, ranking criteria, or how results are ordered. The agent receives insufficient information to decide when to use 'memory.search' over other 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the input schema. The description entirely fails to explain the meaning or usage of the three parameters (query, limit, include_sensitive). This is a critical gap that severely hinders correct invocation.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'ranked local memory results from the SQLite index', which distinguishes it from other tools like 'memory.get' that likely retrieve specific items. However, it does not elaborate on what 'ranked' means, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With over 50 sibling tools, including 'memory.get' and 'memory.graph', the description should indicate contexts where search is preferred. The absence of such guidance reduces its utility for an AI agent.

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