list_memories

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('list stored memories') and that it is for browsing/auditing, which suggests no side effects. However, with no annotations, it does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, safe, or provide any other behavioral traits beyond what is implied.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences and a usage tip. Every sentence adds value, with no unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 (so return values need not be described) and no required parameters, the description covers the basics: listing with optional filters and when to use. It lacks details on pagination or default limit, but is otherwise complete for a list 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?

The description adds meaning for three of four parameters (type, tier, project) by stating they are optional filters. However, it does not mention the 'limit' parameter, and the schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage). Thus, the description partially compensates but is incomplete.

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 specifies the action 'list' on resource 'memories', mentions optional filters by type, tier, or project, and contrasts with sibling tool 'recall' for semantic search, making the purpose very clear.

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 states 'USE THIS WHEN:' to browse, audit, or filter without semantic search, and directs to use 'recall' for semantic search, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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