memoryTimeline

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing that superseded history is included by default, that the default limit is 10 with a max of 50, and that the call does not bump access counters — a non-obvious side-effect distinction that matters for agents reasoning about memory usage stats.

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?

Six short sentences, zero filler, with the primary selection modes front-loaded and constraints (limits, defaults, counter behavior) trailing. Every sentence carries a distinct operational fact.

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?

Six optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations beyond safety hints — the description covers modes, bounds, defaults, and history behavior, and notes output is 'compact' versus getMemory's full records. Only the undocumented `scope` parameter keeps it from being 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden well: it explains memoryId, fromDate/toDate (inclusive, UTC), limit (default 10, max 50), and includeHistory (superseded history included by default). The `scope` parameter is never mentioned anywhere, which is the one real gap.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (browse compact memories) with two precise selection modes: capture order around memoryId, or an inclusive UTC fromDate/toDate range. It also distinguishes itself from getMemory, which returns full details rather than compact entries.

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?

"Provide an ID or both dates" gives a clear admission condition, and "Use getMemory for full details" routes the agent to the right sibling for the expanded-record case. It does not position itself against listMemories, retrieveMemories, or searchMemoryIndex, so the sibling routing is only partial.

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