forget

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the key non-obvious behavior: the record is retired rather than deleted, and the audit chain is preserved. This is valuable context beyond the mere action.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and then adds the critical nuance about retirement versus deletion. 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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schemahaving, the description covers the essential purpose and the most important behavioral caveat. It lacks explicit context about return values or error conditions, but the tool is simple enough that this is not a critical gap.

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 schema has no parameter descriptionscars, and the description only mentions factKey by name. It confirms that factKey identifies the fact to suppress, but adds no detail about the expected format or provenance of the key. The single-parameter simplicity keeps this at an acceptable level.

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 states a clear action ('Suppress') and a specific resource ('a fact') with the identifying key. It also clarifies the semantic distinction from deletion, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like remember and recall.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you have a factKey and want to suppress a fact. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative sibling tool might be more appropriate.

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