get_stale_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool returns memories not recalled or updated recently, but does not mention read-only nature, performance implications, or any side effects. Basic but adequate.

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, extremely concise, and front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose without redundancy.

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 tool with 2 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and use case. It could optionally mention the output format (e.g., list of memory IDs) but is complete enough.

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%, so both parameters are already documented. The description adds the notion of 'age and access patterns' but doesn't provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema defaults and descriptions.

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The description clearly states the tool finds 'memories that may be outdated based on age and access patterns,' using a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('memories'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_memories' by specifying criteria for staleness.

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The description implies usage for reviewing, updating, or deleting outdated memories, providing clear context. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among siblings like 'list_memories' or 'recall_memories'.

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