memory.delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'delete' which implies a destructive action, but it does not confirm whether deletion is irreversible, if it requires confirmation, or what happens to related data. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 one sentence long, front-loads the action, and every word contributes. No filler or repetition.

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 presence of sibling tools (like 'memory.update', 'memory.list') and the high schema coverage, the description adequately distinguishes its purpose. However, the lack of disclosure about permanence of deletion and absence of output schema explanation slightly reduces completeness.

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 high (100%), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the three parameters. It neither clarifies the relationship between 'project_id' and 'project_root' nor explains scenarios where one is preferred.

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 action ('delete'), the target ('memory entry'), and the identifier ('by ID'). It also distinguishes from siblings like 'memory.update' or 'memory.store' by specifying deletion rather than modification or creation.

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 provides a clear usage context: 'Use to remove outdated or incorrect information.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for related tasks, missing a chance for even clearer guidance.

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