Load full memory detail

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive traits. The description adds behavioral context: the return structure ({ found, memory? } with full detail) and the call limit. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four concise sentences: purpose, USE WHEN, DO NOT USE WHEN, LIMIT, RETURNS. Front-loaded with purpose, every sentence adds value, no 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?

Fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, parameter, and return value. With rich annotations and output schema, the description fills all remaining gaps.

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 context: the id comes from search_memory_light and gives an example format 'mem_<hex>'. This goes beyond the schema's minimal 'Memory node id' description.

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?

Clearly states 'Load the full body of a specific memory by id.' It uses a specific verb ('Load') and resource ('memory detail'), and distinguishes from siblings like search_memory_light (candidates) and summary tools.

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?

Explicitly says 'USE WHEN: a search_memory_light candidate looks relevant...' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN: you have not identified a specific memory id...' plus a limit of 3 calls per turn. This provides clear when/when-not guidance with alternatives.

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