copy_memory

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

The description discloses that relations are copied along with entities, which adds behavioral context beyond the input schema. However, it does not explain what happens if entities already exist in the target, whether the operation is idempotent, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the burden but provides only partial transparency.

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, concise sentence that effectively communicates the core action. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 that there is no output schema and the operation involves copying entities and relations, the description is incomplete. It fails to address important aspects such as what the tool returns, behavior on conflicts, or performance implications. Sibling tools like 'create_entities' and 'delete_entities' suggest a need for clarity on how this tool integrates.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three required parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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 verb 'copy', the resource 'memory entities and their relations', and specifies the scope 'from one project to another'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_entities' (which creates new) and 'delete_entities' (which deletes).

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 implies a use case (copying between projects) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use 'create_entities' instead. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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