memory_health_report

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

No annotations provided. Description lists output but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, permissions required, or side effects. Minimal transparency beyond output.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with action and bullet points for output. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 zero parameters and presence of output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and output components. Could elaborate on return value types but sufficient for agent decision-making.

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?

No parameters; schema coverage is 100%. Description adds meaning by detailing the report's contents, exceeding the baseline score of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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?

Description clearly states it generates a health report for the memory palace with specific output components (entry counts, topic coverage, gaps, duplicates, provenance). Distinguishes from sibling tools that add or retrieve individual memory entries.

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?

Description implies use for assessing memory health but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like search_memory or get_topic_memory. Context is clear but lacks exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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