delete_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions deletion modes but fails to disclose side effects (e.g., irreversibility, behavior on conflicts or missing items) or return value. This is insufficient for a deletion 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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence states the main action, second sentence details the modes. Perfectly front-loaded and concise.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks details on error handling, behavior on multiple matches, and prerequisites. Given no output schema and no annotations, more completeness would be beneficial.

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 coverage is 50%, with project_id and session_id lacking descriptions. The description adds context by explaining that project_id, session_id, and key are used together for triple-based deletion, but does not clarify the relationship between id and the triple or what happens when both are provided.

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 that the tool deletes semantic memory items and specifies two deletion modes: by id or by (project_id+session_id+key). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_memories and memory_search.

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 explains when to use each deletion mode but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use the tool or alternatives. It implies usage context by referencing save_memory but lacks exclusions or prerequisites.

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