get_memory_archive_summary

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions permissions (Owner/Admin only) and returns (success, summary), but does not disclose other behavioral traits like authorization failures, side effects, or rate limits. More detail is needed for a read operation with access controls.

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 concise, uses a structured format (purpose, permissions, Args, Returns), and is appropriately sized for a simple tool. No wasted words, but it could be slightly more organized (e.g., clear separation of sections).

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?

For a tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose, permissions, parameter, and return structure. However, it lacks details on the nature of the archive summary and how it differs from similar tools, leaving some informational gaps.

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?

The description adds meaning by explaining 'caller_agent_id' as the caller agent ID and stating it is required. However, the schema marks it as optional with a default null, creating a contradiction. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description partially compensates but with inaccuracy.

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 'Get archive summary information' with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_memory_summary' or 'get_global_memory_archive_summary', which could cause confusion.

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 specifies that only Owner and Admin can use the tool, providing a usage constraint. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and the stated requirement for 'caller_agent_id' contradicts the schema (optional).

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