getMemory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description's 'Read-only; no side effects' reinforces rather than contradicts them. It adds genuine value beyond the annotations by enumerating the returned payload (content, kind, importance, timestamps, session metadata), which matters because there is no output 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return shape, then a clearly labeled WHEN TO CALL section, then a short alternative hint. No sentence is redundant and length is proportionate to a one-parameter read tool.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description usefully lists returned fields and covers the exact-ID prerequisite. It stops short of stating behavior on a missing/invalid ID (empty result vs error), which is the one remaining gap for an agent calling with a stale ID.

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 100% and the single memoryId parameter is already documented with its origin sources. The description restates the 'exact ID' constraint without adding format, length, or failure-mode detail the schema lacks, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch a single memory record by its exact ID') and immediately distinguishes itself from the search/timeline siblings by requiring an exact ID. The returned fields are enumerated, so the agent knows precisely what it gets back.

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 WHEN TO CALL block is explicit: call after searchMemoryIndex or memoryTimeline to hydrate selected IDs, and it names retrieveMemories and listMemories as additional ID sources. It also gives an exclusion — for topic searches start with searchMemoryIndex instead — so the routing decision is unambiguous.

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