memdata_query_timerange

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It conveys the core behavior (search with time range) but omits details like read-only nature, error handling, or result ordering. A brief note about safety (e.g., 'This is a read-only operation') would improve transparency.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. It avoids extraneous detail. One minor improvement: the second sentence could be integrated into the first to be even more compact.

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's simplicity (search with filters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the essential information. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools and provides usage context through examples. Missing details like result format or pagination are acceptable for a tool of this complexity.

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%, with all parameters well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, such as parameter relationships or constraints (e.g., that 'since' and 'until' define a range). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's action ('Search memory') and scope ('within a specific time range'), with concrete example queries that illustrate its intended use. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'memdata_query' by emphasizing the time range constraint.

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 example queries that imply appropriate usage scenarios (time-specific searches). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for general searches without time constraints, use 'memdata_query') or mention alternatives.

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