Run the compression pipeline now

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

The description discloses side effects (writes merged memories, updates pointers, may call external providers) and the config requirement, adding valuable context beyond the annotations. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loading the core action and usage. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be described. The description covers purpose, usage, side effects, and prerequisites. It lacks details on performance or data volume but is otherwise 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 100% for the single parameter, and the description repeats the schema's description. No additional meaning is added, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's action: forcing a compression cycle with specific steps (cluster, merge, mark). It identifies the resource (memories) and distinguishes from the maintenance schedule, which is a sibling context.

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 suggests using the tool after bulk import or to sanity-check compression, and notes that compression normally runs via schedule. It also mentions the prerequisite config flag. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternative sibling tools.

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