get_recent_memories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates that the operation is a read ('Get'), that results are sorted newest first, and that user/agent detection happens automatically when neither ID is supplied. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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: a clear purpose sentence, a compact optional-parameter list, and a return statement. Each line adds value, though the repeated 'OPTIONAL:' prefix is slightly redundant and could be trimmed without losing 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?

The description covers the tool's main behavior, key parameters, and return ordering. An output schema exists, so detailed return fields are not required here. The main gap is the undocumented 'verbose' parameter and the lack of explicit guidance on choosing among sibling memory 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains days, limit, run_id, user_id, and agent_id with defaults and mutual exclusivity, adding real semantics. However, it omits the 'verbose' parameter, so parameter documentation 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get recently added or updated memories.' It also states the output ordering ('sorted by newest first'), which clearly separates this tool from siblings like get_memory, list_memories, or search_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 phrase 'for session continuity' gives some usage context, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of list_memories, search_memories, or get_memory. The intended selection criteria are mostly implied by the tool name and the word 'recently.'

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