search_memories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool filters only metadata ('不含正文'), which is a critical behavioral trait. However, it does not mention read-only nature, pagination, sorting, or required permissions, leaving gaps in transparency for a safe invocation.

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: two short sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the key filtering dimensions and the exclusion of body content, then provides a usage directive. Every word earns its place.

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 the presence of an output schema (which likely documents return values), the description adequately covers the filtering scope and behavioral note (no body). It lacks details on combining filters, pagination, or default limit behavior, but the schema and output schema partially fill these gaps. Overall, sufficient for a focused filter tool.

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?

The description references three of four parameters (category, tag, agent) by their filtering roles, adding meaning beyond the bare property names in the schema. However, the 'limit' parameter is not mentioned, and with 0% schema description coverage, the description does not fully compensate by explaining parameter types, constraints, or how to combine filters.

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 tool filters memories by category, tag, and source agent, and explicitly notes it excludes body content. The phrase '需精确筛选时调用' (call when precise filtering is needed) differentiates it from semantic or list operations, making the purpose very specific and distinguishable from siblings like 'recall' or 'list_memories'.

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 explicitly says '需精确筛选时调用', guiding the agent to use this tool when precise structural filtering is required. It implies not for fuzzy or semantic search, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is clear enough for an agent to choose appropriately among siblings.

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