memory_list

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful filter-matching semantics, but discloses no additional side-effect information beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. The purpose is front-loaded and the additional tag-matching detail is placed efficiently.

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 15 optional parameters and no output schema, the description lacks output information and detailed parameter semantics. It is not fully complete for confident invocation without additional context.

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?

The description gives a high-level sense of filters, pagination, sort, and tag AND behavior, but schema description coverage is 0%. With 15 parameters and no individual descriptions, the description only partially compensates for the missing parameter-level guidance.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('browse'), names the resource ('memories'), and mentions exact filters, pagination, and sort. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling search/list tools beyond implying exact matching.

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?

Provides implicit usage context by describing browsing with filters and sorting, and clarifies multi-tag AND semantics. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like memory_search or memory_get.

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