Forget XMemo memory

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

Annotations already indicate destructive action. The description adds that deletion is permanent, which provides additional behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it could elaborate on the different deletion modes (soft, hard, redact) for more transparency.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the key action and followed by usage guidance. No redundant words; every sentence 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?

For a 6-parameter tool with output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, and key parameter behavior. It could mention the effects of different modes, but overall is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the 'target' parameter accepts 'latest', 'current', or exact ID (schema only says 'current or exact ID'). It also mentions mode options but with less detail. Overall improves understanding beyond 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 tool permanently deletes one memory by natural target ('latest', 'current', or an exact ID). It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'restore_memory' or 'update_memory'.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('only when the user explicitly asks to forget/delete a specific memory') and when not ('search or check activity first if the target is ambiguous'). Provides clear context and alternatives.

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