memdata_query

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it returns similar content with scores but does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, if it modifies data, or any prerequisites. The read-only nature is implied but not confirmed.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word adds information. No redundancy or fluff.

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 tool has only 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main functionality. However, it could mention that the output includes similarity scores, which it does, but fails to clarify the return format or pagination behavior.

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 100%, and the description adds value by providing an example for the 'query' parameter ('e.g., "What did we decide about the database?"') and specifying default and max for 'limit'. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 uses 'search' as the verb, identifies the resource as 'memory', and specifies it returns semantically similar content with similarity scores. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'memdata_list' (listing) and 'memdata_query_timerange' (time-based).

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 implies use for natural language search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'memdata_query_timerange' for time-range queries or 'memdata_list' for listing. No exclusions or specific contexts are provided.

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