memory_forget

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the destructive action ('Delete') and the irreversible consequence of shred=True ('unrecoverable from this vault'). This gives the agent a clear safety profile, though it doesn't detail permissions or what happens to associated links. For a simple delete tool, this is transparent enough.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and no fluff. The shred explanation is directly attached to the parameter it clarifies, making the description efficient and well-structured.

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?

The tool is low-complexity with only two parameters, and an output schema exists to document return values. The description covers the essential action and the key behavioral nuance (shred), making it complete for an agent to use correctly without needing additional detail.

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?

Input schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clearly explains the semantics of shred ('crypto-shreds it, unrecoverable from this vault'), which is the non-obvious parameter. record_id is inherently clear from 'Delete a memory' and the required field name; the description adds value where needed.

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 opens with 'Delete a memory' – a specific verb and resource that clearly states the operation. It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like memory_unlink by focusing on deletion of a memory itself, and adds the shred nuance that makes it clear this is not just a soft removal.

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 context is clear: use this when you need to delete a memory. There are no explicit exclusions or alternative tool mentions, but for a simple destructive operation the guidance is sufficient. The shred option is explained as a deliberate choice for unrecoverable deletion, which aids in deciding whether to use it.

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