memory_list

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

With no annotations, the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only operation via 'List' but omits details about return format, pagination, defaults, or any side effects. This is minimal information for a tool with no other metadata.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with no fluff. It places the core action upfront. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, though conciseness itself is achieved.

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?

The description is incomplete for a listing tool with 4 optional parameters. There is no output schema, no annotations, and the description does not cover return values, default limits, or ordering behavior. The schema provides some enums, but the overall context is insufficient.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only says 'optional filters,' which is already evident from the schema's non-required fields. It does not explain the meaning or usage of 'sort,' 'tags,' 'type,' or 'limit,' adding no real value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the action ('List') and resource ('memories'), and mentions optional filters. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like memory_search or memory_read, which also deal with retrieving memory data.

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. It does not specify prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for choosing memory_list over memory_search or memory_read.

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