search_memory

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'intelligent cache/cloud routing and relevance scoring' but does not explain details like whether the tool modifies state, caching behavior, or response format. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or limits.

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, front-loading key concepts. While concise, it could benefit from clearer structure or bullet points without adding much length.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and lack of behavioral detail, the description is incomplete. An agent lacks information on return values, pagination, error cases, or how 'hybrid search' operates across cache and cloud.

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 50%, with descriptions only for 'query' and 'prefer_cache'. The tool description adds no additional explanation for these or other parameters (limit, user_id). Baseline 3 due to partial coverage, but description does not enhance understanding.

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 states 'Hybrid search with intelligent cache/cloud routing and relevance scoring' which identifies the action (search) and resource (memory) and hints at specialized behavior, distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_memory or delete_memory. However, the jargon 'intelligent cache/cloud routing' may obscure the exact purpose.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as find_connections or get_all_memories. The description does not specify scenarios or prerequisites for hybrid search.

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