get_memory_entry

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions return structure (success, entry or error), which is helpful, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or rate limits expected from a read operation.

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 with front-loaded purpose and structured Args/Returns. Every sentence adds value, though the return format could be omitted given an output schema exists.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, read operation) and existence of output schema, the description adequately covers functionality. It explains parameters and return format, though caller_agent_id purpose could be expanded.

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 includes brief parameter explanations, but incorrectly marks caller_agent_id as required (schema shows optional). Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate; the error undermines reliability.

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 states 'get a memory entry by key', clearly indicating the action (get) and resource (memory entry). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_memory_entries and delete_memory_entry, but does not explicitly differentiate from retrieve_from_memory.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus others. The description does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or context for selection.

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