Show XMemo memory statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context by clarifying that it returns aggregate counts, not raw memories, and supports time-range filtering. This aligns with annotations and adds value beyond the structured fields.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and resource. It wastes no words and includes the key trigger condition. This is exemplary conciseness.

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 moderate complexity, 8 optional parameters, full schema coverage, output schema presence, and comprehensive annotations, the description is complete. It conveys the purpose, the kind of output (aggregate stats), and the invocation context. No critical information is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level meaning by mentioning groupings (type, source, location) and optional time range, which reinforces the semantics of the group_by and since/until parameters. It does not introduce new details but synthesizes the parameter intent.

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 function: 'Shows aggregate statistics for all saved XMemo memories — counts by type, source, location'. It specifies the resource (XMemo memories) and the action (show aggregate statistics), and the mention of optional time ranges and groupings distinguishes it from sibling tools like recall_context or get_timeline.

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 provides a clear use case: 'when the user asks for counts, breakdowns, or distributions'. This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for different scenarios, but the context is sufficient for selection among siblings.

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