Delete Multiple Memories

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

Annotations already carry destructiveHint=true, and the description aligns with that. It adds value beyond the annotation by disclosing batch semantics, per-item results, and partial success behavior. It does not contradict the annotations, and the additional behavioral details are relevant for an agent deciding on error handling.

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 tight sentences lead with the primary action and scope, then immediately convey important return semantics (per-item results, partial success). No filler or repetition of schema details.

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 single-parameter tool with a 100% documented schema, a destructiveHint annotation, and an output schema already covering return structure, the description provides the remaining essential context: that it is batch and supports partial success. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, with the hashes parameter already documenting the 1-50 count and memory-hash nature. The description adds the notion of 'by hash' and 'batch operation' but does not meaningfully extend parameter understanding beyond the schema. 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete'), the resource ('memories'), and the key scoping ('multiple', 'by hash', 'single batch operation'). This also distinguishes it from the sibling delete_memory, which is singular, and from other memory tools. The title reinforces the plural nature.

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 clearly implies this tool is for deleting more than one memory at once and highlights partial success support, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative delete_memory or state when to prefer one over the other, so it stops short of full guidance.

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