forget

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

Without annotations, the description discloses the key behavioral traits: archiving (not deletion), reversibility via restoration, and the need for confirmation. It doesn't detail side effects but adequately sets expectations.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first explains the function, the second provides critical usage guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given simple function and full schema coverage, the description covers what the tool does, its effects, and when to use it. Lacks mention of response or timing, but completeness is high for this context.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, but provides context that the 'id' refers to a memory that will be archived. 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?

The description clearly states the tool archives a memory to remove it from search, with reversible action (can be restored). The verb 'archive' and resource 'memory' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'restore' and '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?

The description explicitly instructs to call only after explicit, unambiguous user confirmation, which is a strong guideline. It doesn't name alternative tools but gives clear when-not-to-use context.

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