memo_consolidate

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds specific behavioral details: uses AdvancedConsolidator, client sampling, and merge synthesis runs on calling model up to MEMO_SAMPLING_MAX_CALLS. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence provides value (purpose, safety guarantee, implementation detail). No wasted words.

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 the tool has an output schema and complete parameter schema, the description covers the tool's behavior thoroughly. It explains the primary function, safety characteristics, and underlying algorithm, which is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to invoke it.

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% (all three parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not add meaningful information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline is 3 for high coverage, and no extra parameter context is given.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Detect near-duplicate clusters and propose merges'. It specifies the action (detect and propose) and the resource (near-duplicate clusters). It also notes it is read-only, distinguishing it from mutation tools like memo_delete or memo_update.

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 states 'Read-only — returns proposals without modifying the corpus', which tells the agent when to use this tool (for exploration without side effects). It references a sibling tool (memo_consolidate_list_archived) for comparison, though that sibling isn't in the provided list. No explicit exclusions, but clear context.

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