forget_all

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

Discloses atomic behavior (all-or-nothing, partial failure rollback) and that memories can be un-archived with forget(restore=true). Also explains what to report after archiving. No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits.

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?

Concise: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage guideline, third covers behavior. No extraneous words. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, description covers input requirements, behavioral guarantees, and post-action reporting. Sibling tool 'forget' provides context for comparison. Complete for a batch archive tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with description of 'items'. Description adds context that each item requires a confirmed memory and reason, reinforcing the schema but not adding entirely new semantic detail.

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 'Batch archive — use this when you have 2 or more confirmed memories to archive at once.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'forget' by specifying it is for multiple items and more efficient.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (2+ confirmed memories) and when not to (never on implication/casual mention). Provides alternative: multiple forget calls. Includes explicit confirmation protocol.

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