List memory banks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that. It adds that the tool returns only memory bank titles, not full bank content, but it does not disclose other behavioral details such as ordering, limits, or output shape; the output schema handles the return structure.

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 short, purposeful sentences with no filler. The action and purpose are front-loaded, and the usage guidance is direct.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It states what is listed, why, and when in the workflow to call it relative to get_bank and targeted search.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline for zero-parameter tools applies, and the schema coverage is trivially complete.

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 specific verb and resource: 'List memory bank titles' and explains the purpose, 'so you can pick the right timeline.' It clearly distinguishes this discovery tool from get_bank and targeted search by framing it as the precursor action.

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 says to use it 'before get_bank or a targeted search,' which gives clear workflow context. It does not name all sibling alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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