Retrieve stored memories newest first with pagination; optionally filter results by primary sector.
List memories newest first, with pagination. sector optionally filters by primary sector.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| sector | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior: results are ordered newest-first and pagination is supported. It omits auth/permission requirements, default page size behavior beyond the schema default, and what happens at the end of the result set.
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 short sentences, front-loading the ordering behavior an agent needs most. Nothing is wasted, though 'with pagination' is slightly redundant given the limit/offset parameters.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for a three-parameter tool at 0% schema coverage with several similar retrieval siblings, the description leaves limit/offset semantics and sibling routing unaddressed.
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 description coverage is 0%, leaving limit, offset, and sector undocumented in the schema. The description compensates partially by explaining that sector filters on the primary sector and that limit/offset drive pagination, but gives no defaults, ranges, or format guidance.
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 a specific verb+resource ('List memories') plus ordering ('newest first') and pagination support. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling search_memories or semantic_search, so the distinction must be inferred from the verb.
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 is implied: this is the unfiltered enumeration path versus the sibling search tools, and 'sector optionally filters' hints at narrowing. However nothing states when to choose this over search_memories or semantic_search, and no exclusions are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.