memory_consolidate

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Clearly describes effects: merging duplicates, synthesizing concept memories, returning counts. Indicates non-destructive but modifying. No hidden behaviors mentioned.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded: the main purpose is in the first line. Each sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is fairly complete. It explains the consolidation process, safety, and return values. Could mention that it's safe and returns counts, which it does.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (owner, scope). The tool description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 the tool's purpose: 'Merge duplicate memories and synthesize concept memories (housekeeping).' It includes a specific verb ('merge', 'synthesize') and resource ('memories'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory_add or memory_search.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'Safe to run occasionally rather than per-write.' Explains it is for housekeeping, collapsing duplicates and combining clusters. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context implies it is for periodic maintenance.

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