nexus_memory_forget

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint and idempotentHint, and the description repeats 'DESTRUCTIVE' but adds new context 'Audit-logged', which is a behavioral trait not present in annotations. The matching method is also revealed, though partly covered by schema.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core action, the second adds audit and destructive warnings. Every word earns its place, and critical information is 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, high schema coverage, annotations for destructive/idempotent), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, input method, and audit logging. The main gap is the lack of clarification on how text matching behaves (exact vs partial), but this is not critical for basic usage.

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 already provides 100% coverage of the single parameter with 'Memory ID or text to match and remove'. The description merely restates this without adding examples, constraints, or details on matching semantics (e.g., exact vs substring), so it adds no additional parameter meaning.

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 the verb 'Delete' against the resource 'memories' and specifies the method 'by ID or text match'. This unambiguously differentiates it from sibling tools like nexus_memory_search or nexus_memory_write.

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?

The description implies usage (when you want to delete memories) but provides no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it. It does not mention using nexus_memory_search to find IDs first, leaving alternatives to be inferred.

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