query_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the search method (semantic and keyword) and the return format (list with similarity scores). While it doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior, the word 'query' implies no mutation, and the description adds useful context beyond a simple 'Query memories.'

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 compact and well-structured with a clear one-sentence purpose followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides necessary information with no redundancy or 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?

For a 2-parameter query tool with an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, and return value shape. No additional context is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by defining each parameter: query as 'Natural language search string' and top_k as 'Number of results to return (default: 3).' This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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's function: 'Query memories using semantic and keyword search.' It specifies a specific verb (query), resource (memories), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like save_memory and delete_memory by focusing on retrieval.

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 usage for searching memories but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_agendas. It lacks exclusions or conditions, leaving the agent to infer based on the name and resource.

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