forget_memory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the delete is permanent and irreversible ('the row is gone, not hidden'), which is essential for a destructive operation. It does not mention behavior for nonexistent IDs, but the permanence warning is strong.

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?

Three concise, purposeful sentences: action, usage guidance, and behavioral warning. No filler or redundant information, and the most critical facts are front-loaded.

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?

For a one-parameter delete operation with an output schema, the description covers when to use it, what it does, the alternative, and the permanent consequence of invocation. Nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents memory_id sufficiently, including its source from previous store_memory or search_memory calls. The description adds little beyond restating 'by id', which is acceptable since the schema carries the semantic weight.

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?

States the exact action ('Permanently delete one memory by id') with a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function immediately clear. It is distinguishable from siblings like update_memory and search_memory based on the delete-per-id scope.

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 describes when to use the tool: when a memory is wrong beyond correction, sensitive, or no longer wanted. It also names the alternative update_memory for fixing rather than deleting, giving clear routing guidance.

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