forget

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Drop' clearly implies a destructive removal, but the description does not say whether the action is reversible, what happens for an unknown key, or whether any related state (e.g., presets derived from the fact) is affected.

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 one lean sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and object, adds a concise condition, and every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter destructive tool, the description is mostly complete. It provides the action, target, identifier, and motivation, though it omits edge-case behavior like missing keys or confirmation requirements.

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 for the single parameter, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'key' identifies a remembered fact, but does not describe where the key comes from, its format, or how to discover valid keys.

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 uses a specific verb ('Drop') and resource ('a remembered fact by its key'), making the tool's core function clear. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'remember' by being the inverse operation, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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?

It states a clear condition for use: 'once it is wrong or spent.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives 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.