memory_get

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

Without annotations, the description clearly states it is a read operation returning full content and connected neighborhood, implying non-destructive behavior. No mention of auth or rate limits, but acceptable for a read tool.

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, no filler, front-loaded with the key purpose and contextual usage. Each word earns its place.

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 output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (full content + neighborhood). Could be slightly richer on the structure of the connected region, but sufficient for an agent.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds context about the 'id' coming from memory_search but does not add new meaning beyond the schema for the other parameters.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Returns'), resource ('FULL content of one memory PLUS its connected graph neighbourhood'), and distinguishes from siblings like memory_search by calling this 'Stage 2'.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after memory_search' and explains it provides 'depth on demand without re-reading files', giving clear context but not listing exclusions or alternative tools.

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