memory_get_many

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations, the description adds meaningful behavior: missing keys are omitted from results, the operation respects DELX_MEMORY_NAMESPACE, and the batch size is capped at 50. These are non-obvious details that materially affect how an agent interprets results.

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?

Three short, information-dense sentences with no filler. The core operation is front-loaded, followed by the most behaviorally relevant details (omission and namespace). Every clause 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?

For a read-only batch lookup with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, the description covers all essential invocation details: operation type, key limit, missing-key behavior, and namespace handling. The schema fills in privacy_mode semantics, so nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description's 'max 50' and 'missing keys omitted' notes reinforce the keys parameter, and it adds the namespace context, but it does not add substantial new semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 phrase ('Batch exact-key lookup') with an explicit resource and operation mode. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like memory_get (single lookup) and memory_search (non-exact search) by emphasizing exact-key batch semantics.

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 makes the usage context clear: use when performing exact-key batch lookups, with a hard limit of 50 keys. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but 'exact-key' strongly implies this is not for fuzzy or list-based retrieval.

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