Forget a memory

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds critical context beyond these: it records a cross-device delete (so it won't reappear), and explains the action is minor/re-creatable and thus requires no confirmation. This materially enriches the behavioral model for an agent.

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, no fluff. The first sentence states the core action and source of id; the second explains side effects and the no-confirm rationale. Information is front-loaded and 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?

For a simple, single-parameter tool with no output schema, this description covers the action, the id source, cross-device persistence, reversibility, and why no confirmation is needed. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call it 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 description coverage is 100% and both the schema and description state the id is from list_memory. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States the exact verb 'Delete' and resource 'saved Memory item', and explicitly references the id source (list_memory). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like remember and list_memory by identifying the delete operation.

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?

Conveys clear usage context: use this when you have a memory id (from list_memory) and want to remove it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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