ck_memory_search

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

States 'Read-only' behavior and describes search details (freeform text across titles/bodies/tags, filtering by type, source, and top_k). Returns 'ranked records with citations and scores'. No annotations provided, but description compensates well, though lacks specifics on permissions or rate limits.

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 paragraph of 7 sentences, well-structured: purpose first, then key parameters, then alternatives. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

Despite lacking output schema, description explains return format ('ranked records with citations and scores'). Covers all key aspects: scope (current session), search capabilities, filtering, defaults, and sibling differentiation. Sufficient for an agent to use 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 coverage is 88%, baseline 3. Description adds value: 'query is a freeform text search applied across record titles, bodies, and tags' and 'record_type filters by type (decision, finding, proof, goal, brief, checkpoint); omit to search all types'. Also notes top_k default of 10. Some parameters (e.g., project_root, session_id) are not elaborated, but schema covers them adequately.

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 specifies verb ('Search'), resource ('governed typed memory for the current session'), and context ('recover prior decisions, findings, proofs, and domain knowledge'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by naming alternatives.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('retrieve what was recorded in prior steps or sessions') and when to use alternatives ('Use ck_memory_record to write new records. Use ck_experience_search for full-text search across findings and tasks workspace-wide').

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