memory_list_compact

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

Without annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It transparently lists the exact return fields (id, content preview first 80 chars, tags, created_at) and implies a read-only operation by describing a list action. A slight deduction for not explicitly stating it's read-only, but the output details are comprehensive.

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 well-structured with a deprecation warning first, then the parameter list in a clear Args section. It could be slightly more concise by shortening some parameter explanations, but overall it's organized and easy to scan.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description already covers the return fields. All parameters are explained, usage context is given (deprecated, prefer alternative), and no gaps remain for an agent to invoke this tool 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 coverage, the description compensates fully by providing clear, plain-English explanations for all 9 parameters, including defaults and format expectations for date filters and tag logic.

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 explicitly states it lists memories in compact format with specific fields (id, preview, tags only) and distinguishes itself from sibling tool memory_list which now defaults to compact previews with richer fields.

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 clearly advises against using this tool by labeling it deprecated and directing users to memory_list instead, which provides richer fields and configurable options. This explicit when-not-to-use guidance exceeds typical usage guidelines.

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