memory_unpin

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral consequence: unpinning allows the memory to be forgotten over time. However, it does not mention reversibility, failure modes, or what happens after unpinning beyond the forgetting implication.

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, one sentence, with a clear argument list. No fluff or redundant wording; it is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 tool, the description covers the essential action and consequence. It does not detail return values or error handling, but the output schema is not shown, so this is acceptable. The exclusion of low-level behaviors does not detract significantly from the completeness.

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?

The description explains the parameter 'memory_id' as 'The ID of the memory to unpin,' providing clear meaning beyond the schema's minimal string type. This fully satisfies parameter semantics.

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's action: 'Remove pin protection from a memory, allowing it to be forgotten over time.' It distinguishes this from siblings like memory_pin (which adds protection) and memory_delete (which removes the memory entirely).

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 the use case (unpinning a memory) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., memory_pin or memory_delete). No direct comparisons or conditions are provided, leaving the user to infer the appropriate context.

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