Memory Delete Fact

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Delete' but doesn't mention irreversibility, potential side effects, permissions required, or the behavior when the fact_id doesn't exist. The optional user_id and agent_name parameters are not explained in terms of their effect on deletion scope.

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 extremely concise, with two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and usage. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple delete-by-id tool, the description covers the basic usage but lacks important context such as irreversibility, error handling, or scope implications of the optional parameters. Given the destructive nature and lack of annotations, more detail would be appropriate.

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 each parameter is already documented. The description adds a helpful reference for fact_id ('from `memory_search`'), but the optional parameters' semantics are left to the schema. Overall, it provides marginal added value over the schema.

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 a single fact) and the resource (by id), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes it from update and search siblings by emphasizing deletion of a specific fact.

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 a clear trigger: 'Use when the user says a stored fact is wrong or no longer applies.' This gives direct guidance on when to invoke the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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