forget_weak_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action ('Bulk-delete'), but does not elaborate on side effects, reversibility, or performance impact. The dryRun parameter is noted in schema but not highlighted for safety. Adequate but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 with no wasted words: first sentence defines action and resource, second sentence differentiates from siblings. Front-loaded with key information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 optional parameters, no output schema), the description and schema together provide sufficient information for an agent to decide when to invoke. It lacks detail on return values or confirmation, but is otherwise complete. Slight room for improvement by stating what the tool returns.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., threshold meaning, maxCount limits). No extra value from description.

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's action: 'Bulk-delete memories that fell below a decay threshold' with specific verb 'delete' and resource 'memories'. It distinguishes from siblings 'forget_memory' and 'archive_entities' by naming them and contrasting the mechanism (decay-based vs. content match or criteria-based move).

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 tells when to use this tool vs. alternatives by stating 'Unlike forget_memory (content match) or archive_entities (criteria-based move), this uses decay-based importance scoring.' This gives clear guidance on selection criteria.

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