agent_forget

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the action is destructive, permanent (no recycle bin), and returns a specific success message or not-found error.

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 with two sentences: the first states the core function and condition, the second provides alternatives and consequences. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

For a simple deletion tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, usage context, side effects, and error handling. It is 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 coverage is 100% as there is only one parameter 'key' with a description. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 tool's purpose: 'Permanently delete a single key from encrypted agent memory.' It uses a specific verb-action ('delete') and resource ('key from encrypted agent memory'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like agent_remember (overwrite) and delete_secret (for credentials).

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 explicitly guides when to use the tool ('retract obsolete or misremembered context') and when not to ('prefer overwriting via agent_remember' for updates, use delete_secret for credentials). It also warns of destructive behavior with no recycle bin.

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