forget

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the permanent (irreversible) nature of the deletion, which is the key behavioral trait. The contrast with correct() also implies that forget does not preserve history. However, it does not mention authorization requirements or potential side effects, which would strengthen transparency.

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 two sentences, each earning its place. The first states the core purpose concisely, and the second provides essential usage guidance and an alternative. No filler or redundant information.

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 simple delete operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, when to use it, and the alternative. It lacks explicit error handling or idempotency details, but these are less critical given the simplicity and the presence of an output schema.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not explain 'memory_id', its format, or how to obtain it. While the name is fairly self-explanatory, the description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, and with low coverage it fails to compensate.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently delete a memory.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'correct' by pointing out that correct preserves history, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 states when to use the tool ('Only use for completely wrong information') and when not to use it, directing users to an alternative ('For outdated info, use correct() instead — it preserves history'). This provides clear guidance relative to sibling tools.

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