Metis · Memory Curator — Get Topic Memory

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states ordering and filtering but does not mention side effects, safety (read-only assumption), pagination, or limits. The read-only nature is not explicitly stated, and potential size of returned data is omitted.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an args listing, with the main action front-loaded. Every word contributes essential information, no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks context on what constitutes a 'memory entry' (e.g., fields included) and how this tool differs from other memory retrieval tools, which is relevant due to many siblings.

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 single parameter 'topic' has 0% schema description coverage. The description adds a clear explanation and concrete examples (e.g., 'metis-setup', 'phd-research'), which compensates well. Could be improved by specifying allowed characters or format, but it suffices.

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 specifies the verb 'Return' and the resource 'memory entries tagged with a specific topic', with ordering 'newest first'. This distinctively identifies its function among siblings like search_memory or list_recent_memory.

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?

Usage context is implied by the description (use when you need all entries for a topic, newest first), but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. The description does not differentiate from similar tools like search_memory.

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