search_temporal

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, how data is returned, whether it aggregates or lists, or any side effects. The phrase 'analyze memory patterns' is too high-level and provides no additional behavioral context.

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 sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it is slightly generic, which reduces its utility, but as a concise statement it is effective.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and no description of return values or aggregation behavior. The description is not complete enough for an agent to confidently use the tool beyond knowing it analyzes memory over time. It lacks context about what 'memory patterns' means or how to interpret results.

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%, so each parameter already has a clear description. The tool description adds minimal meaning beyond confirming the temporal nature via 'over time periods', which maps to start_date, end_date, and period_type. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Analyze memory patterns over time periods' clearly states the action (analyze) and resource (memory patterns) with a temporal scope. It is coherent and matches the tool name, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling search tools like search_semantic or search_patterns beyond the temporal angle.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of ideal scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description only states the function, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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