agent_memory_namespaces

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 disclosure. It mentions 'list all' and 'storage quota usage' but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it discuss authentication requirements (beyond the api_key), rate limits, or any side effects. This is a minimal disclosure for a potentially safe operation.

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 sentence, highly concise and front-loaded. While it lacks some details, it earns its place by being efficient. However, it could be slightly expanded to improve completeness.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify the return format. It mentions 'list' and 'storage quota usage' but does not specify whether the result is a list of names, objects with quota fields, etc. This is a significant gap for a tool that returns complex data.

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% (the only parameter, api_key, is fully described in the schema). The description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists all memory namespaces and storage quota usage. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like agent_memory_list (which lists items within a namespace) and others.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like agent_memory_list or agent_memory_get. The context of sibling tools implies it is for namespace-level listing, but the description does not provide any when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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