list_global_memory_archive

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

Discloses authorization requirement and return format (success, entries, count), but does not mention potential side effects (none likely) or pagination behavior. With no annotations, description partially covers transparency but lacks detail on rate limits or data scope.

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?

Efficient and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, a note, then clearly labeled args and returns. No unnecessary words.

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 2-parameter list operation, description covers purpose, access, parameters, and return fields. Lacks explanation of 'archive' distinction from current memory, but output schema (not shown) likely provides additional structure. Adequate overall.

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?

Provides descriptions for both parameters (limit max results default 50, caller_agent_id required) despite 0% schema coverage. However, there is a contradiction: schema marks caller_agent_id as optional with default null, but description says it's required (必須). This 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?

Description clearly states it retrieves a list of global archive entries common to all projects, and distinguishes from siblings like 'list_global_memory_entries' (which lists current global memory) by using 'archive' and noting owner/admin restriction.

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 access restriction (Owner and Admin only) but does not explicitly guide when to use this vs alternatives like 'search_global_memory_archive' or 'list_global_memory_entries'. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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