consolidate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It describes the four operations and their threshold parameters, and notes that dry_run defaults to True and only reports. However, it does not disclose whether actions are destructive (e.g., deleting notes or releasing claims) or if there are any irreversible effects.

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 one-sentence intro followed by a bullet-like list of each operation. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. It is well front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema existing, the description covers the core logic and parameter usage adequately. However, it lacks context about potential side effects, safety, or comparison to similar tools like 'compost'.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning by explaining how each parameter is used: dry_run for dry-run mode, note_cosine and verbatim_cosine as thresholds for duplicate detection, stale_days and orphan_days for defining staleness and orphan age. This goes beyond the bare schema which only provides titles and types.

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's for 'periodic memory hygiene' and lists four specific operations with criteria, making it clear what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'compost' or 'agent_memory_cleanup'.

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 mentions 'dry_run=True (default) reports only' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparisons to sibling tools.

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