memory_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits on its own. It only states the operation ('Delete a memory entry') but does not disclose whether the deletion is permanent, what happens if the key does not exist, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient 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, focused sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple CRUD operation and clearly front-loads the action ('Delete') and the target ('memory entry').

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and the absence of annotations, the description is minimally viable but lacks behavioral context. It does not mention irreversibility or failure behavior, which would be expected for a mutation tool, leaving some gaps for the agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100% for the single required 'key' parameter, with the schema already explaining 'Key of the memory to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 function with a specific verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('a memory entry'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like memory_write, memory_read, and memory_list, which perform different operations on the same resource.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions that warrant deletion, prerequisites (e.g., key existence), or exclusions (e.g., when to use context_clear instead). It leaves the agent to infer usage purely from the name and schema.

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