agent_memory_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the return format ('JSON with keys success, count, entries') and the filtering behavior, going beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a brief Args list and Returns line. Every sentence is relevant, and the format is immediately scannable.

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 tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and thorough annotations, the description is complete. It communicates the core operation, optional filters, and return format, leaving no major gaps for an agent to make mistakes.

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%, with each parameter already described in the schema. The description's Args section repeats the same descriptions verbatim, adding no new meaning. The only additional context is the overall 'optionally filtered' phrase, which applies to the tool as a whole rather than individual parameters.

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 explicitly states 'List memory entries, optionally filtered by category and/or tag,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like agent_memory_search (which likely performs semantic search) and agent_memory_load (which loads a specific entry).

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?

The description implies the tool is used for listing entries with optional filters, but it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this versus agent_memory_search or agent_memory_load. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools, so the guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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