Recall context within a token budget

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. Discloses greedy packing and criticality ranking, but does not cover idempotency, state mutations, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. Adds some value beyond the name but lacks comprehensiveness.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey the core function and usage. While concise and front-loaded, the description could benefit from a structured breakdown, but overall it avoids unnecessary words.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description partially covers purpose and usage but lacks details on parameter semantics, return format, and side effects. Adequate but not fully comprehensive for an agent to use without additional information.

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 only 33% (only tokenBudget has a description). The tool description does not explain query or userId parameters, leaving them undefined. Fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, so minimal meaning is added beyond the schema.

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?

Describes returning the most critical memories for a query, greedily packed within a token budget. Clearly states verb and resource, distinguishing from sibling tools by emphasizing the token budget and context-block output, though not explicitly differentiating from memory_search.

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 to use this tool to load long-term memory into a limited context window before answering. Provides clear context for when to use, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like memory_search or mention when not to use.

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