merge_memories

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only, idempotent, and destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those flags: atomicity, lack of intermediate files, and the deduplication behavior for strategy 'skip' by msg_id and summary. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Three focused sentences, each adding distinct value: the operation and scope, the atomic/one-shot nature, and the deduplication rule. No fluff or repetition of schema content.

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 6-parameter schema and destructive annotations, the description plus schema provide enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It could go slightly further by describing what the call returns, especially since there is no output schema, but that is a minor gap for a mutating merge operation.

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 schema fully documents all six parameters. The description adds minor value by detailing how the 'skip' strategy deduplicates, but it does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation.

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 names a specific operation ('Merge memories, episodes, and profiles from one agent into another') and the exact resource scope. The phrase 'Atomic one-shot equivalent of export→import without intermediate files' strongly distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_memories and import_memories.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when a single atomic merge between agents is desired, avoiding the multi-step export→import flow. It does not explicitly give exclusion criteria or name alternatives, but the contrast with export/import is enough to guide selection among related siblings.

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