memory_status

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as being read-only, required permissions, or side effects. The term 'Show' suggests read-only, but this is implicit.

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 with a single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action. However, it could be slightly more structured for 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 no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks important context. It does not clarify what 'memory counts' entails (e.g., per category) or define 'stale/needs-revalidation', leaving the agent with an incomplete understanding.

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 input schema has one parameter 'cwd' with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention or explain it. Agents must infer its purpose without guidance.

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 shows memory counts and stale/needs-revalidation memories for the current repo. It uses a specific verb 'Show' and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_memories or get_memory.

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 implies it is for checking counts and stale items, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like review_memories or list_memories.

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