delete_memory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that a nonexistent point_id raises an error because existence is checked first, and that collection defaults to the server-configured one. It does not state that the deletion is permanent/irreversible, whether it requires elevated permissions, or whether it can remove multiple points.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the failure mode and the optional scoping parameter. No filler or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and both parameters plus the error path are covered. The one notable omission for a destructive tool is an explicit irreversibility/permission note.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for both parameters: point_id is the ID of the stored point whose existence is validated, and collection scopes the deletion with a documented default (server-configured collection). No format examples (e.g., ID scheme) are given, but meaning is clear.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (a stored memory/point) in the vector DB, keyed by ID. It is unambiguous what the tool does and clearly distinct from search_memory/update_memory, though it never names the siblings explicitly to route the agent.

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?

Usage is implied by the obvious CRUD semantics, and the error-on-missing-id note gives some operational context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to delete versus update_memory or how to handle a memory that should be removed but not destroyed.

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