get_all_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions pagination support and cache behavior (prefer_cache, include_cache_stats) which gives some transparency. However, it does not disclose if the operation is read-only or if there are any side effects, and the 'hybrid' behavior is vague. Not contradictory.

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 that is concise and front-loaded with the key operation. It efficiently communicates core functionality without extraneous words. Minor improvement possible by adding structure for complex features.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not explain the return format or what 'memories' include. For a tool with 5 parameters and caching intelligence, the description leaves significant gaps about behavior, limits, and output structure, making it incomplete for an 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?

Schema description coverage is 80%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about pagination and caching that relates to parameters like limit, offset, prefer_cache, and include_cache_stats, but does not detail any parameter values or formats explicitly. The undocumented user_id parameter is not addressed.

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 'Get' and resource 'all memories', and includes specifics about hybrid cloud/cache intelligence and pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like search_memory but could be more precise about 'hybrid cloud/cache intelligence' meaning.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_memory or deduplicate_memories. The description implies usage for retrieving all memories but does not state when not to use it or provide context for choosing among related tools.

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