list_memories

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

Without annotations, the description bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'list' implying read-only, but does not confirm safety, idempotency, or clarify if data is modified. Basic transparency is present but could be more explicit (e.g., read-only hint).

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 a single concise sentence of 6 words, fitting the minimal viable. It front-loads the action and key features. While efficient, it lacks some structure (e.g., separate sections) but earns points for brevity.

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 6 optional parameters and 17 sibling tools, the description is adequate but not thorough. It omits details like default sorting, total count behavior, and does not hint at output format (no output schema). More completeness would benefit agent decision-making.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'pagination and filters' but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Parameters like 'district' and 'archetype' are already well-described in the schema.

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 'List stored memories with optional pagination and filters', specifying the action (list), resource (memories), and key features. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'search_memories' and 'retrieve_memory' by focusing on listing with filters.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_memories' or 'memory_stats'. The description implies it's for paginated filtered lists but does not mention exclusions or preferred scenarios.

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