memory_recall

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

Without annotations, the description discloses return structure (two lists), default read_k=5, and suggests usage pattern. It adds behavioral context beyond what schema provides, though some aspects like permissions or side effects are not covered.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, benefit over alternatives, return format, usage timing. No superfluous content. Well-structured and 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 4 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers usage pattern, return structure, and key defaults. Missing explanation for k and include_deleted, but overall fairly complete for a search tool.

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 compensate. It explains read_k (top results) and default 5, but does not explain k (likely number of search results) or include_deleted. Partial compensation.

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 'Search memory' and specifies the resource 'memory', returning full content for top results. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning it replaces memory_search + memory_read.

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 explicit guidance on when to use: 'instead of memory_search + memory_read' and 'at the START of every task and whenever you hit unfamiliar territory'. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the positive guidance is strong and clear.

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