delete_memory

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

Annotations already indicate destructive/read-only traits, and the description adds meaningful specifics: the operation is irreversible, removes from storage/cache/search index, invalidates cache, and returns a confirmation text. No contradiction exists with idempotentHint or destructiveHint.

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 front-loaded with the primary action and includes useful return and side-effect details. It loses a point for redundancy: 'Irreversible operation' repeats 'Permanently remove', and the side-effects fragment duplicates 'removes from storage, cache, and search index'.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value, side effects, and a relevant alternative workflow. The only notable behavioral detail not repeated in the description ('succeeds if ID not found') is already present in the input schema, so nothing essential is missing.

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 memory_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the 'succeeds even if ID not found' behavior. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond the word 'by ID', which is acceptable given the complete schema.

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 ('remove'), resource ('memory'), and key ('by ID'), making the tool's core purpose unmistakable. It also distinguishes this from sibling deduplicate_memories by framing that tool as the bulk-deletion preview alternative.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to use deduplicate_memories with dry_run first for bulk deletions, providing a concrete alternative. It does not exhaustively specify every condition for choosing delete_memory over other siblings, but for a single-object delete operation the guidance is sufficient.

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