memory_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. While the name 'query' suggests read-only, the description fails to explicitly state this or any other behavioral traits.

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: one sentence stating the core action, followed by a usage guideline sentence. No wasted words, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Despite 7 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the tool's role and usage context adequately. However, it lacks behavioral transparency and does not describe return values or pagination behavior in detail, limiting 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds overall context (e.g., 'targeted hits, temporal filters, pagination') but does not add specific parameter details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Query the temporal knowledge graph for relevant context,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like memory_checkout by noting it is for targeted hits, temporal filters, or pagination rather than a prompt-ready packet.

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 explicitly says 'reach for it when you need targeted hits, temporal filters, or pagination rather than a prompt-ready packet,' providing clear when-to-use guidance and contrasting with an alternative tool (memory_checkout).

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