inspect_memory

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions 'progressively inspect' and depth parameter, but omits side effects (read-only vs modify), output format, or limitations. Insufficient behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two sentences, concise and front-loaded: first sentence defines purpose, second provides usage context. No wasted words.

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?

With 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief to fully guide use. Lacks details on what MemoryNode is, return structure, and behavior for different depths or evidence inclusion.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description barely explains parameters: only inspection_depth is hinted; memory_id, current_task, include_evidence are not described. Fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 inspects a MemoryNode including its children, relations, and evidence, and distinguishes from the sibling tool retrieve_agent_context by specifying when to use it.

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 after retrieve_agent_context when more depth is needed on a specific memory', providing clear context but no exclusion criteria or other alternatives.

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