Delete an existing memory

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

Description only says 'deletes' without detailing consequences, reversibility, or authorization needs. Annotations lack readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, so the description carries the burden, which it does not meet. No mention of what happens if id is omitted or scope-based behavior.

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?

Description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It could be more concise (e.g., 'Deletes a memory by id.') but is acceptable.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are managed. However, for a destructive tool, details on prerequisites (e.g., ownership, scope implications) are missing, leaving the agent uncertain about side effects.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds the notion of 'using the provided id' but doesn't clarify the optionality or relation to scope, so it adds little 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?

Description clearly states deletion of a memory using an id, distinguishing it from siblings recall (read), remember (create/update), and update (modify). However, it mentions 'using the provided id' while id is optional in the schema, which could cause slight confusion.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use forget versus siblings recall, remember, or update. The description assumes the agent knows the context, but fails to provide usage scenarios or exclusions.

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