search_memories

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses case-insensitivity, text matching, credit cost, and no need for vector config. Does not mention read-only nature or any side effects, which limits transparency.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema and description does not specify return format. For a search tool, return structure (e.g., list of matches) is important. Context signals show no output schema, so description should compensate but does not.

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% with separate descriptions for agent_id and query. Description adds 'Search term. Matched against keys and values' but this largely repeats schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds minimal new value over 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?

Description clearly states 'Case-insensitive text search across keys and values for a given agent', using specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_memories and retrieve_memory by implying search functionality.

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?

Mentions 'No embeddings or vector configuration required. Costs 1 credit', providing context for when to use this search over alternatives. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or exceptions.

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