list_memories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description only adds that browsing is optionally filtered. No additional behavioral traits like pagination or sorting are disclosed, but the annotation coverage reduces the burden.

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?

Description is only two sentences plus an example. Every word is informative, with no repetition or fluff. The action guide is clearly separated and front-loaded.

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 simple tool (2 params, neither required) and presence of output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention ordering or that it returns all matching memories, but the output schema likely covers return format.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It provides a usage example showing how to set category and limit, adding context beyond the schema defaults and types. However, it does not explain valid category values or that limit controls the number of returned items.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'browse' and resource 'memories', with optional filtering by category. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_memory, delete_memory, and search_memory, which have different purposes.

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?

Explicit action guide states when to use: 'view a broad set of memories, or see what's in a specific category.' It provides a concrete example (category='preference', limit=10). However, it does not mention when not to use or suggest alternatives like search_memory for specific queries.

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