sage_forget

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions deprecation but does not clarify what 'deprecate' entails (e.g., soft delete, irreversibility, permissions). The procedural hint for corrections is helpful but behavioral details about the action itself are missing.

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 sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the primary purpose, the second adds critical usage guidance. Efficiently front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

The tool is simple with 2 parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose and usage guidelines but lacks details on what 'deprecate' means (e.g., can it be undone, any side effects?). Given the simplicity, a minor gap remains.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; 'memory ID to deprecate' mirrors the schema. No additional context like format or constraints is provided. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Deprecate a memory by ID') and the resource ('memory'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sage_remember by specifying that for corrections, one should call sage_remember first. The verb 'deprecate' is specific and matches the tool name.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when no replacement is needed') and when not to use ('never call this first' for corrections). Provides clear alternative: call sage_remember with replaces_memory_id. This helps the agent select the correct tool.

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