Compact memory store

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

Discloses preview vs apply modes and backup creation, which are important behavioral traits. However, lacks detail on side effects (e.g., irreversibility after apply beyond backup, performance impact). No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentences, front-loaded with key action and followed by critical side-effect (backup). No redundant phrasing; every word earns its place.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description should provide more operational context (e.g., how retentionDays interacts with time, preview vs apply behavior, confirmation steps). Current description leaves agents guessing about parameter details and tool behavior.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description adds meaning by linking 'deduplication' to the dedupe parameter and 'deleted-record purging' to dropDeleted. retentionDays is mentioned but not explained (no unit or effect). confirm parameter is entirely absent from description, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 verb 'Preview or apply' and resource 'memory store', listing specific operations: deduplication, expired-record removal, retention, and deleted-record purging. It distinguishes from siblings like purge_memory (all-out removal) and doctor_memory (checkup) by specifying exact compaction actions.

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 usage for cleaning up memory through deduplication and retention, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. With many sibling tools (e.g., purge_memory, doctor_memory), more guidance on choosing this over alternatives would improve usability.

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