delete_memory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and explicitly discloses the critical behavioral trait: 'PERMANENT deletion' and 'cannot be undone.' This clearly warns the agent about irreversibility, which is the most important behavior for a destructive tool.

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 short and front-loaded: action, required parameter, and warning. Every sentence adds information, and the warning is placed prominently.

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?

The tool is simple and destructive, and the description covers purpose, required input, and irreversibility. The output schema exists, so return values are not the description's responsibility. Missing guidance about the verbose parameter and sibling differentiation prevents a perfect score.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains memory_id as a required UUID, adding value beyond the schema. However, it completely ignores the second parameter 'verbose', leaving its effect undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Delete memory by its unique ID.' It clearly identifies the operation scope (single memory by ID) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like bulk_delete_memories or delete_all_memories, which operate on multiple memories.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you have a specific memory_id and want to delete that one memory. It also states the required precondition (memory_id must be provided) but does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions relative to sibling delete tools.

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