rlm_memory_verify

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

Description claims 'verify' (read-like), but the mark_stale_if_missing parameter defaults to true and mutates state by marking memory stale. This contradiction misleads the agent about side effects. No annotations to compensate.

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?

Single sentence, no filler. Efficiently conveys the main action.

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?

Lacks explanation of return values, behavior when evidence is valid, and the mutating default behavior. Without output schema, more context is needed for an agent to use it 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?

Schema covers both parameters fully (100% coverage), so description adds no extra value. Parameter descriptions in schema are already clear.

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?

Description clearly states the tool verifies whether a Memory V2 record has valid supporting evidence, with a specific verb and resource. Differentiates from sibling memory tools (e.g., compact, invalidate) even without explicit comparison.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rlm_memory_invalidate or rlm_recall. Does not mention prerequisites or context.

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