sage_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the transparency burden. It does disclose nuanced domain behavior, including that explicit domains are never remapped and that omitted domains resolve to the authenticated home domain in app-v23. That said, it mostly repeats schema-level domain details and does not describe return shape, pagination behavior, or side-effect expectations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose. The only minor inefficiency is duplicating domain behavior details that are already expressed in the input schema.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description provides a solid but incomplete picture. It explains the domain nuance well, but it does not clarify what kind of results are returned, how filters interact, or when a sibling tool would be preferable.

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 83%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema: the domain behavior in the description already exists in the domain parameter description, and other fields like tag, status, offset, and limit are already well-documented.

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 leads with a clear verb and resource: 'Browse memories with filters.' This makes the tool's core purpose obvious. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools such as sage_recall or sage_timeline, so it misses the top score.

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 provides useful context around domain-omission behavior, especially the app-v23 versus pre-v23 difference. However, it never explicitly says when to use sage_list over its sibling tools or when not to use it; the usage guidance is implied rather than stated.

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