memory_delete

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

The description clearly indicates a destructive operation ('Delete a memory'). However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., cascading deletions, permission requirements, irreversibility). With no annotations, the description partially covers behavioral traits but could be more thorough.

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 short and includes all necessary information, but the 'Args:' formatting adds some verbosity. It could be condensed into a single sentence without losing clarity.

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 straightforward purpose, the description is mostly complete. The presence of an output schema covers return value details. It might mention that deletion is permanent, but overall it suffices for correct tool invocation.

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 explains both parameters: memory_id as the ID to delete, and force with its meaning and a recommendation to use an alternative tool. This adds significant value beyond the schema's type and default, though further detail on memory_id format or constraints is missing.

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 'Delete a memory by id', specifying the verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like memory_delete_batch (batch deletion) and memory_delete_document by explicitly referencing the latter as an alternative for clean document removal.

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?

Explicitly mentions when to use the force parameter ('allow deleting document fragments/roots') and when not to ('Use memory_delete_document() instead for clean document removal'), providing clear guidance on alternatives.

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