delete_memory

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing whether the deletion is permanent, irreversible, or requires special permissions. The output schema exists but its content is not hinted at, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior.

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 that is very concise and front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices informational value. While it earns points for efficiency, it could be slightly longer to include critical details without losing 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 simplicity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens if the id is invalid, whether the operation is idempotent, or what the output contains. The agent lacks enough context to use the tool reliably without additional knowledge.

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 0% and the parameter 'memory_id' has no description in the schema. The description adds only 'by id', which does not clarify the expected format (e.g., UUID, integer) or provide any guidance beyond the parameter name. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema 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 'Delete one memory by id.' clearly states the verb (delete), resource (memory), and method (by id). It distinguishes from sibling 'delete_all_memories' which deletes multiple memories, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_all_memories' or 'update_memory'. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., memory must exist) or when not to use it. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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