Puts a memory into dormancy without deleting it so it is no longer recalled during normal retrieval. Use it to quiet specific memories while preserving them for later reactivation.
手动让一条记忆进入休眠（不删除，只是平时不被唤起）。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | 记忆 id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the memory is not deleted and that it simply will not be recalled under normal conditions. It does not state whether the sleep is reversible, how to reverse it, or whether any permissions or side effects apply.
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 compact sentence with zero waste. The core behavior and the non-deletion constraint are front-loaded.
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 simple one-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the essential behavior and clarifies that data is not destroyed. It is slightly incomplete because it omits reversibility details and explicit routing to memory_wake, but the core semantics are sufficient given the simple schema.
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 single required parameter 'id' is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds no additional semantics about the identifier beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.
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: manually putting a memory into sleep. It also distinguishes the action from deletion ('不删除'), which helps separate it from memory_delete. However, it does not explicitly name memory_wake as the counterpart, so sibling differentiation is strong but not complete.
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?
Usage is implied: use this when you want a memory to stop being recalled normally without deleting it. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer memory_delete or memory_wake, and no stated prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.