list_recent_memory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the basic function but omits details like ordering (ascending/descending?), what constitutes 'recent', scope (all memory types?), or side effects. Minimal disclosure for a tool that likely reads data.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus a parameter description. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Has output schema, so return values need not be detailed. However, the description doesn't specify the format of memory entries (text, metadata, etc.) or any constraints, which could leave an agent uncertain. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains parameter 'n' as 'Number of entries to return (default 10)', which goes beyond the schema's type and default. Clear and helpful.

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 it returns the n most recent memory entries with a default of 10, which is clear and specific. However, doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like search_memory or get_working_memory, but the name and description imply a distinct list operation.

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?

Provides a concrete use case: 'Useful at the start of a session to recall what was last worked on.' This gives clear context, but does not mention when not to use or alternatives.

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