memory_set_model

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as the need for confirmation (implied by the confirm parameter), whether existing embeddings are re-indexed, or if the change is project-specific (implied by the project parameter).

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 very brief (one sentence) and front-loads the key action and options. However, it could be better structured by including inline parameter explanations, though it already avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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 the tool has 3 parameters, no annotation coverage, and a known output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks explanation of the confirm and project parameters, does not describe return values, and omits behavioral details like side effects or scope.

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 0% and the description only names the two presets but does not explain the 'preset' parameter's exact format or enumerations. It also ignores the 'confirm' and 'project' parameters entirely, leaving their purpose unclear.

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 the verb 'Switch', the resource 'embedding model', and the two preset options 'english' and 'multilingual'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like memory_reembed or memory_model_info by specifying the action of switching presets.

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?

The description implies the tool is for switching between preset models, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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