delete_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does add a behavioral constraint (only on explicit user request), but it does not disclose the permanence of the deletion or any potential side effects. For a destructive operation, this is a notable absence.

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, with the first sentence providing the core action and the second adding usage guidance. No redundant information.

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 simple, but the description lacks parameter semantics and does not address what happens if the memory file does not exist. The output schema may cover return values, but the input usage is not fully specified. Overall, it is minimally sufficient.

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?

The schema has one parameter, memory_file_name, with no schema description (0% coverage). The tool description only mentions 'memory file' and does not specify the expected format, path, or any constraints for the parameter. It adds little beyond the parameter name itself.

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 that the tool deletes a memory file, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling memory tools (write_memory, read_memory, list_memories) by focusing specifically on deletion.

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?

It explicitly states that deletion should only happen upon explicit user request, and provides concrete examples of such requests. This clearly delineates when to use the tool and guards against proactive deletion.

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