forget

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the need for the delete capability, but it fails to warn that deletion is irreversible or explain what happens to associated memories. The selection semantics (entities vs. memory_id) are also absent, leaving the agent unaware of potential side effects.

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, tight sentence with no wasted words, efficiently stating the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the action, though it omits necessary details that would make it complete. The brevity is appropriate, but the lack of parameter context keeps it from being a 5.

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?

This destructive tool has two optional parameters and no required fields, meaning it could delete a broad or narrow set of memories depending on input. The description should explain how entities and memory_id interact, but it doesn't. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the selection semantics and irreversibility are gaps that make the description incomplete.

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%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It merely says "selected memories" without explaining that the entities array or memory_id parameter determines what gets deleted. This leaves both parameters completely ambiguous, and the description does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 action (delete) and the resource (selected memories), which distinguishes it from siblings like store, retrieve, and search. However, "selected" is vague and doesn't specify how selection occurs, leaving some ambiguity about the tool's exact scope.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like retrieve or search. It only notes a permission requirement (the delete capability), which is operational rather than usage context, so the agent gets no hints about appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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