查看/搜索记忆

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It communicates a non-mutating list/search action and notes that all filters are optional, but it does not state the default result when no filters are given, the scope of the search, or output/pagination behavior.

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 short and starts with the core action, but the Chinese and English halves largely restate each other ('列出或搜索已保存的预设' vs 'List/search saved presets'). It is minimal and not overly verbose, yet the duplication slightly undermines conciseness.

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 tool with five optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not clarify how memories relate to presets, what each filter selects, or what the tool returns, leaving an agent with incomplete context for invocation.

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 only 20%: only query is documented in the schema. The description adds only 'all filters optional' and does not explain project, category, task_type, or status semantics, so it fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'list/search saved presets,' which clearly names the operation. It is weakened by a terminological mismatch: the tool name and title say 'memories' (记忆) while the description says 'presets' (预设), and it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like recall_presets or memory_overview.

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 phrase 'all filter conditions are optional' gives clear calling context (no required parameters), but there is no guidance on when to choose this tool over recall_presets or memory_overview. Usage is implied rather than explicitly scoped.

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