memory_export

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

The description contradicts the explicit limit parameter definition in the input schema: the description states 'Max 1000 records per export' while the schema defines default=1000 and maximum=10000. This inaccuracy could mislead an agent about the tool's capacity. Annotations correctly mark it as read-only, but the description adds conflicting information.

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 concise sentence covering purpose, filtering, and a constraint. It wastes no words, though the limit inaccuracy detracts slightly from its effectiveness.

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?

The description covers the output format (JSON) and basic filtering, but fails to mention pagination (offset/has_more) which is available in the schema, and does not describe the response structure or differentiate from similar export siblings. Given no output schema, more detail on return values would be beneficial.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond restating the filter parameters (scope, namespace, department) and introduces a potentially misleading limit of 1000, which is already expressed more precisely in the schema.

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 it exports memories as JSON for backup or migration, specifying the output format and high-level use case. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like memory_export_dataset or memory_export_vault, missing an opportunity to clarify unique scope.

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 mentions filtering by scope, namespace, and department, giving context on when to use it. However, it fails to provide guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, and the mention of 'Max 1000 records per export' is an oversimplification given the schema allows up to 10000.

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