logicmem_memory_recall

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'search,' implying read-only, but does not disclose whether it modifies state, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The meaning of 'relevant' is also unspecified.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. However, it is too brief to provide helpful context; a slightly longer description could improve utility without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return format or ranking behavior. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what results look like.

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?

All 3 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning about parameter interaction, valid query formats, or typical limits.

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 states 'Search memory for relevant entries,' clearly indicating a search/retrieval action against the memory resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling search-like tools (e.g., logicmem_memory_reflect might also retrieve info).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like logicmem_memory_log (store) or logicmem_memory_reflect (process). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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