Ask memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions optional synthesis and that without a command it returns context, but it does not explain side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'context' exactly constitutes.

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 compact at two sentences with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the main action. However, it could be more structured to separate the two modes clearly.

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 no output schema and 0% schema parameter documentation, the description should compensate by explaining the returned context, how synthesis works, and relationships with siblings. It fails to provide enough detail for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description only implicitly references the 'question' parameter by saying 'Retrieve relevant context' but does not describe 'limit' or add any meaning beyond the schema's type constraints.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves relevant context and optionally synthesizes an answer. It specifies the verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'memory context'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling 'search_memory', which likely has similar functionality.

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 mentions two usage modes (with and without PATHMARK_CHAT_COMMAND) but does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_memory' or 'remember'. No explicit context or exclusions are given.

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