Tidy pass

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive; the description adds that it 'only suggests' and returns 'stalest cold memories', providing behavioral context beyond structured fields.

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: two sentences plus a param/return line, no filler, and the most important purpose is 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter, and results adequately. It could specify the return format more precisely, but it is sufficient given the context and sibling tool references.

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 description simply restates the parameter 'limit' with its default, which is already present in the input schema. No additional meaning is added beyond the schema's description.

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 returns a batch of stalest memories for review, and explicitly contrasts with sibling tools by indicating it is read-only and only suggests actions, which distinguishes it from mindmap_promote, mindmap_update, and mindmap_forget.

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 explains that this tool is for the 'opt-in curation game' and instructs the agent to use mindmap_promote, mindmap_update, or mindmap_forget to act on items, providing clear when-to-use and what-to-do-next guidance.

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