memory.recall

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful context: encrypted, persistent memory, which conveys that the operation is a safe, non-mutating read. This complements annotations without contradiction.

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?

Single sentence, 15 words, zero filler. Front-loaded with the core action. Every word adds value.

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 simplicity (one parameter, full schema coverage), the description is complete enough. It doesn't need to explain return values since an output schema exists. It covers the essential behavioral context (encrypted, persistent) that helps the agent mentally model the operation.

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% with the parameter 'key' described as 'Memory key to retrieve.' The description adds the retrieval semantic by indicating this is a lookup operation, providing enough context for the agent to understand the key's role. The baseline is 3 due to high coverage, but the phrasing 'by key' reinforces the parameter usage.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Retrieve a previously stored value from the agent's encrypted, persistent memory by key.' It distinctly specifies memory as the resource and the action of retrieval by key, distinguishing it from sibling memory.store and other unrelated tools.

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 usage for recalling stored values, but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusion criteria. Since memory.store is the only direct sibling for memory operations, some implicit context exists, but no alternatives or conditions are stated.

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