agent_memory_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral transparency. It states that the tool returns keys with types and sizes, not values, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements (implied by required api_key), pagination, or 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 very concise, consisting of a single sentence. It conveys the essential purpose and return information without any superfluous text. However, it could be slightly restructured for clarity, e.g., separating the action from the return specification.

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 that there is no output schema and only three parameters, the description provides the basic return expectation (keys with types and sizes). It does not cover error scenarios, behavior for missing namespaces, or pagination. For a simple listing tool, it is adequate but not completely thorough.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the 'namespace' and 'prefix' parameters. It marginally reinforces the filtering role but lacks additional detail.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'keys in a memory namespace'. It also specifies that it returns keys with types and sizes, not values, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like agent_memory_get (which returns values) and agent_memory_set.

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 implies usage as a tool for listing keys, but it does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as agent_memory_get, agent_memory_delete, or agent_memory_namespaces. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned.

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