list_memory_entries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions return structure but incorrectly states caller_agent_id as required (schema shows optional), which is misleading. Does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or pagination behavior.

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 extremely concise: two lines for purpose, two lines for args, one line for returns. No wasted words, well-structured.

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?

With an output schema present, description need not detail return fields, but it does so sufficiently. Missing details like pagination, default sorting, and behavior when no tags are provided. The contradiction about required parameter also reduces completeness.

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 beyond the schema by stating tags are for filtering and caller_agent_id is required. However, the required claim contradicts the schema (both are optional), which slightly 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 clearly states 'Retrieve a list of memory entries', specifying the verb (list) and resource (memory entries). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_memory_entry (single), save_to_memory, and search_memory_archive.

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 provides parameter guidance but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions. It does not compare to alternatives like search_memory_archive or note limitations (e.g., pagination).

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