sage_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects. The word 'browse' implies read-only but is not explicit.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose. It is efficient, though could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing filters).

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 list tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal context. It omits return format, pagination behavior, and sort semantics. However, given schema descriptions cover most details, it is adequate but not complete.

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 high (83%), so baseline is 3. The description adds the concept of filters but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It adds marginal value.

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 browses memories with filters, specifying the resource (memories) and action (browse). It gives concrete filter examples (domain, status, tag), which helps differentiate from sibling tools like sage_forget or sage_remember.

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 vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention when to use sage_list versus sage_inbox or sage_recall. The 'use this to see what memories exist' is brief but lacks exclusions or comparisons.

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