Recall Memory

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that searches are substring and case-insensitive, and returns specific fields (key, value, tags, updated_at). This provides useful behavioral details beyond annotations.

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 concise and well-structured. It front-loads the main action, then explains parameters and returns in a bulleted style, plus an example. Every sentence adds value 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?

Given that annotations cover safety/idempotency, schema covers all parameters, and the description explains return format, the tool is fully specified. No output schema is needed because the description explicitly lists returned fields.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context: 'exact key', 'search term to match', and explicitly mentions case-insensitivity and substring matching. It also clarifies the default limit of 10, which is not in the schema's default field.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'saved notes', and distinguishes between fetching by exact key and searching by substring. This differentiates it from sibling tools like memory_save, memory_delete, and memory_list.

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 explicitly says 'Call this when you might already know something the user told you earlier,' providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough.

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