Get Memory

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

With annotations already indicating read-only and idempotent, the description adds valuable behavioral context: behavior with no args (all files concatenated, frontmatter stripped, potentially large), empty string return when no memory files exist, and detailed error scenarios.

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 clear sections (general behavior, example, usage guidance, errors, return value). No wasted sentences; each part contributes useful information.

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?

For a tool with 2 params, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers all critical aspects: input combinations, edge cases (no files), error handling, and relationship to sibling tools.

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?

While schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, the description adds meaning beyond the schema: the file+section combination behavior, case-insensitive matching, optional suffix handling, and an explicit example.

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 tool reads semantic memory from About Me/ files, specifies the resource (structured memory files with H2 headings), and distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly recommending vault_read_note for non-memory notes and vault_list_memory_files for discovery.

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?

It provides explicit 'When to use' guidance, tells the agent to call vault_list_memory_files first, and names the alternative (vault_read_note) for non-memory notes.

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