memory_list_dumpable_files

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only listing operation but doesn't mention any side effects, permissions, output format, or interaction with the memory image. The agent gets minimal safety or behavior information.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the action. It's concise and free of fluff, though it could include more useful information without sacrificing brevity.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a terse description, the tool lacks context about expected outputs, use cases, and how the pid filter works. While the core function is clear, the overall context is insufficient for confident tool selection.

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%, and the schema already explains both parameters. The description adds no additional parameter context, so it meets the baseline but doesn't enhance meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('files that can be extracted from memory cache'), clearly conveying the tool's function. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like memory_list_sessions or memory_list_plugins, but the resource is distinct enough.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as memory_dump_process or memory_list_plugins. The description only states what it does, not the context or preconditions for use.

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