temporal

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the dual meaning of 'days' (inactivity threshold for stale, look-ahead for upcoming) and the purpose of each action. It does not contradict annotations.

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 well-structured with a brief intro, bullet list of actions, and a clear parameter list. It is front-loaded with purpose and uses minimal words. However, the parameter list could be slightly more concise.

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 has 4 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers all parameters and the two modes of operation. It does not describe return values (likely covered by output schema) or error cases, but for a read-only query tool, it is fairly complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides clear explanations for each parameter: action (stale/upcoming), days (threshold/window), limit (max results), namespace (optional filter). It adds meaning beyond the schema names and types, especially clarifying the role of days.

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 finds stale or upcoming memories based on time, with specific actions 'stale' and 'upcoming' that distinguish it from sibling tools like 'recall' or 'remember'. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and provides differentiation.

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 describes when to use each action: 'stale' for maintenance (unused memories) and 'upcoming' for proactive alerts (approaching deadlines). While it does not mention when not to use the tool or alternative tools, it gives clear context for each action.

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