mnemos

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Search'), but annotations indicate `destructiveHint: true` and `readOnlyHint: false`. The description completely fails to explain why a search operation is destructive or what side effects/data mutations occur.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence with no filler. However, brevity is excessive given the behavioral complexity (destructive side effects) that requires explanation.

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?

Insufficient for a tool marked destructive with no output schema. The description omits critical context about what gets destroyed, the nature of returned results, and pagination behavior despite the `limit` parameter.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters adequately. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, though it implicitly clarifies the 'hybrid' mode option.

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 identifies the action (search), resource (memories), and method (hybrid text+semantic). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `mnemos_get` (likely ID-based retrieval) or `mnemos_context`.

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 guidance is provided on when to use search vs. direct retrieval, or when to select text vs. semantic vs. hybrid modes. No mention of prerequisites or alternatives.

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