memory_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic functionality and does not mention side effects (expected none), rate limits, output details, or prerequisites like authentication or project scoping.

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 sentence, which is efficient but may be too brief given the tool's complexity. It front-loads the main action but lacks structure and additional context.

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 8 parameters, many sibling tools, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover default behaviors, pagination limits, or how results are sorted by default. The existence of an output schema is not mentioned, though it partially compensates.

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 schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only vaguely groups parameters into filtering, sorting, and pagination but does not explain individual parameters or their semantics, leaving the agent to infer from names and defaults.

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 tool lists memories and mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination, which helps differentiate it from other tools like memory_search or memory_recall. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from all sibling tools.

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 versus alternatives such as memory_search, memory_recall, or memory_list_projects. The description only states what it does, not when or when not to use it.

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