ck_memory_search

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

Description adds context beyond annotations: it is read-only, performs freeform text search across titles/bodies/tags, returns ranked records with citations and scores. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true; description reinforces and elaborates.

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?

Description is front-loaded with main purpose, then parameter details, then usage guidance. Every sentence is informative with no wasted words. Structure is clear and logical.

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 9 parameters, output schema present, and rich annotations, the description fully covers usage, parameters, and context. It explains when to use, what each parameter does, and the return format (ranked records with citations and scores). An agent can confidently select and invoke the tool 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 89% high, yet description adds meaning: explains query as freeform text search, record_type filters by type listing options, top_k limits results with default 10, source_type and source_id filter by origin, detail_level options compact vs full. This adds significant value beyond schema.

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 'Search governed typed memory for the current session to recover prior decisions, findings, proofs, and domain knowledge.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like ck_memory_record and ck_experience_search.

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 provides when to use: 'Use ck_memory_search to retrieve what was recorded...' and when not: '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.