get_memory_info

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it returns a JSON string, which is adequate for a simple read-only tool. However, it could disclose that it requires no input or permissions, but the description is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. Every word adds value: states purpose and return format. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 no parameters and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the tool's purpose and return format. Could add detail about what memory statistics are included (e.g., free, used, total), but not essential.

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?

No parameters exist in the input schema, so the description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline score of 4 applies as no further explanation is required.

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 gets memory (RAM) usage statistics and returns a JSON string. It is specific (verb 'get' + resource 'memory usage statistics') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_cpu_info (CPU) or get_disk_info (disk).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_system_info for broader info). Usage is implied by the name and description, but explicit when/when-not instructions are missing.

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