review

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

Explicitly states 'Read-only: yes. No side effects', fully disclosing behavioral traits in the absence of annotations. It also mentions the return may be empty, adding 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?

Concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance, behavioral note, and return format. Every sentence is informative and 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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema (implied), the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, its side-effect-free nature, and the return structure, making it complete.

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?

With no parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the return type and behavior, though no parameter details are needed.

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 uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'memories flagged for review', clearly stating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get' (retrieve specific) and 'recall' by focusing on flagged items.

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 advises 'Use this to surface issues that need human attention' and 'Call periodically to catch data quality issues', providing clear usage context but lacking explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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