search_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral burden. It states it's a semantic search but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, auth requirements, rate limits, or whether it modifies state. The description lacks details beyond the basic function, leaving the agent uninformed about important behavioral aspects.

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, front-loading the key function. Every sentence adds value, and there is no unnecessary information. It is well-structured for quick understanding.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage. It explains semantic matching and typical use cases. However, it lacks details on result format, sorting, or performance characteristics, which would be helpful for full context. Still, it is reasonably complete for a search tool.

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 88%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context for the 'query' parameter (emphasizing semantic matching) but does not significantly enhance meaning for other parameters. The 'source' parameter lacks any description in the schema or description text, slightly reducing clarity.

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 it's a semantic search tool for short-term memories using Jina embeddings, distinguishing it from keyword search and sibling tools like list_memories. It specifies the resource (demo.memories) and the action (semantic search by meaning), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: to recall past decisions, find related context, or check if something was already discussed. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, the usage hints are sufficient for an AI agent to decide.

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