Forget a preference

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

Annotations already mark destructive and idempotent. The description adds that default mutes are recoverable, and hard=true deletes, plus returns confirmation. This goes beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 concise sentences plus a parameter list, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Covers all essential aspects for a simple tool: action, parameter effects, source of IDs, and return type. No output schema needed, but mention of confirmation is sufficient.

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%; the description restates parameters and links 'hard' to behavioral effect (delete vs mute), adding value beyond 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The description clearly states the tool removes or mutes a persona fact, with specific examples (wrong or out of date). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'persona fact' and directing to mindmap_persona for IDs.

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The description explains when to use (for outdated/incorrect facts) and implies origin of IDs, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives like mindmap_forget for non-persona facts.

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