memory_get_index

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It explains the progressive disclosure behavior, what the output contains (existence and cost), and what it excludes (full details). Doesn't mention ordering or pagination, but adequate for a read-only index 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?

Two concise sentences: first states action and resource, second adds context on what is shown. No filler, 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?

Adequate for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema. Explains purpose and high-level output, but lacks detail on the index format (e.g., fields returned). Could be slightly more complete.

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% with a clear description for 'limit'. The description's 'all recent observations' could imply no limit, but doesn't add significant parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'progressive disclosure index' of recent observations. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explaining that it shows existence and retrieval cost without full details.

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?

Implies use for overview and cost estimation before retrieving full details, and 'without full details' suggests using another tool for full content. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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