list_agent_memories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention pagination, ordering, or what happens with no results. The description is minimal and leaves the agent to infer safety from the 'list' verb.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose. No wasted words, but could be slightly expanded to include the agent override possibility. Still concise enough to be effective.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain the return format. It mentions 'topics, keywords, and previews' but does not clarify structure, pagination, or the effect of the include_full_content parameter. The description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's output.

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 6 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the schema already provides meaning. The description adds only a redundant mention of the keyword filter. It does not add new semantic value beyond what the schema offers, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'memories', with specific details about contents (topics, keywords, previews) and an optional filter. It distinguishes from siblings since no other tool lists memories, though it omits the agent_id_override capability.

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 mentions the optional keyword filter, giving a basic usage hint. However, it provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., query_agent_kb) or exclusions. The usage context is implied but not explicit.

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