Delete a memory fact

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

The description adds crucial details beyond the destructiveHint annotation: 'Permanent — no undo, and no snapshot is taken.' This informs the agent about irreversibility and lack of backup, which is important for decision-making.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, scope, and a critical warning. Every word adds value with 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, no output schema) and the presence of annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, mechanism, and side effects, which is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It mentions 'by its id', which gives semantic meaning to the single parameter, but it doesn't specify what the id refers to beyond the context. It is adequate but could be more explicit.

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 action 'Remove', the resource 'memory fact', and the mechanism 'by its id'. This distinguishes it from sibling memory tools like memory_save, memory_search, and memory_list, which perform different operations.

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 intended use is evident: to delete a saved memory fact when you have its id. It doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it, but for a simple delete operation the context is clear enough.

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