memory.recall

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only, destructive potential, or required permissions. The alias nature implies it behaves identically to memory.search, but no details are given.

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 very short and to the point, which is good for conciseness. However, it is too minimal to provide value beyond identifying the tool as an alias. It could be considered under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely lacking. An agent cannot determine how to properly invoke this tool or what it returns. The alias declaration alone is insufficient.

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?

Parameter schema has 0% coverage and the description adds absolutely no information about the five parameters. The agent has no semantic guidance for using parameters like root, topK, query, backend, or maxFiles.

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 it is an alias for memory.search, which indicates the purpose of memory recall/search. However, it does not explain what memory.search does, so the purpose is somewhat reliant on understanding the sibling tool.

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 it is for Agent clients that use 'recall wording', but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus memory.search or other siblings. No when-not-to-use or alternatives are given.

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