memory_store_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral transparency. It mentions the tool returns details but does not disclose whether it is read-only, potential error conditions (e.g., ID not found), or any side effects. The description is adequate for a simple getter but could be more explicit.

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 of 14 words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and efficiently lists the returned fields. No superfluous information.

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 of the tool (one parameter, output schema present), the description covers the essential purpose and input. It does not include usage context or error handling, but the output schema presumably documents return fields. Minor gap in not describing potential errors.

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 0% description coverage; the parameter is just a string. The description adds value by specifying the format ('memstore_*' id), but it does not provide examples or constraints beyond that. For a single parameter, this is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('one memory store's details'), and the identifier type ('by `memstore_*` id'). It also lists the returned fields (name, description, timestamps), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'memory_store_list'.

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 retrieving a specific memory store via its ID. The presence of a sibling 'memory_store_list' naturally differentiates between list and single-item retrieval. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites.

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