jambavan_memory_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the deletion modes and return confirmation. However, it does not state permanence, permissions, or side effects, which are important for a destructive operation.

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?

Three sentences with no unnecessary words. The most important information is front-loaded: what it does, then how, then what it returns.

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 both usage modes and the return format (confirmation with count). It lacks details on error handling or invalid inputs, but for a simple delete tool it is adequately complete.

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 100% with individual parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining how parameters interact (id for single, scope+delete_scope for bulk), going beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool deletes a memory by OKF concept ID or wipes all memories in a scope. It specifies two distinct actions, differentiating it from sibling tools like jambavan_memory_store and jambavan_memory_recall.

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?

Explicit instructions are given for single deletion (provide id) and bulk deletion (provide scope with delete_scope: true). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but provides clear context.

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