memory_temporal_analysis

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states a vague analytical purpose, omitting whether the tool is read-only, what side effects exist, or any output format.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it insufficient for understanding tool functionality.

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 complexity (0 required params, 1 enum, nested object, many sibling tools, no output schema), the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain return values, behavior, or how to effectively use the analysisType enum.

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 input schema has 0% parameter description coverage. The description adds no meaning to the parameters; the 'query' object is defined with empty properties, and 'analysisType' enum values are not explained. The agent gains no insight into how to use these parameters.

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 'Analyze temporal patterns and trends in memory data' clearly states the verb and resource, but fails to distinguish from sibling tools like memory_insights or memory_intelligent_analysis, which likely have overlapping functionality.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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