marrow_retrieve_memories

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'full-text search' and filters but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, how results are sorted, whether filters are combined, or any rate limits or authentication requirements. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then enumerates filters. Every word earns its place; it is concise and scannable.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description gives a general overview but omits details like the limit parameter, result format, and pagination behavior. It is complete for a quick overview but leaves gaps for an agent to fully use the tool correctly.

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 documents each parameter. The description lists the filter names but does not add meaning beyond the schema (e.g., how filters interact, date format specifics, or limit semantics). It provides a useful summary but no additional semantics.

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 ('Full-text search') and resource ('memories'), and lists the available filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_memories (browsing) and get_memory (retrieving a specific memory), 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 implies usage for searching memories with filters, but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over alternatives like list_memories or get_memory. It provides clear context for search scenarios but lacks exclusions or comparison with siblings.

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