memoria_buscar

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It implies a read-only search but does not explicitly state non-destructiveness, performance characteristics, or what happens with no results. The return format is not described, though an output schema exists.

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 that front-loads the purpose. It is efficiently worded, but could benefit from slight expansion without losing conciseness.

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 presence of sibling tools and no output schema details in the description, the definition lacks context on when to search vs read/list, and omits behavioral traits like pagination or filtering behavior. Incomplete for a 3-parameter tool.

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 100%, so parameters are well documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond the schema (e.g., how 'query' is matched, case sensitivity). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it searches memory entries by full text (verb 'busca' + resource 'entradas de memoria' + method 'por texto completo'). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'memoria_leer' (read specific) and 'memoria_listar' (list all), but lacks nuance about scope.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'memoria_leer' or 'memoria_listar'). No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisites are mentioned.

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