recall

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

The description explains the auto-routing and session-first search fallback behavior, which is useful. However, since there are no annotations, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or disclose any side effects, rate limits, or error handling. More details 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 well-structured with a brief introductory sentence followed by a parameter list. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds value, and the key information 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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains the search behavior and parameters. However, it lacks details about the return format, pagination, or error conditions, which would be useful for complete understanding.

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?

The description provides detailed explanations for all parameters, including the `search_type` options, `datasets` format, `session_id` purpose, and `top_k` default. This adds significant meaning beyond the sparse input schema, which has 0% coverage.

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 purpose: 'Search memory with auto-routing and session awareness.' It uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('memory'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'remember' and 'forget' by detailing the search behavior.

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 clear usage context, such as when session_id is provided without datasets or search_type, it searches session cache first. It also explains auto-routing when search_type is not specified. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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