brief

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

Annotations already declare read-only. Description adds rich behavioral context: it returns a dense, structural brief not for human reading, explains the format (static memory + live working set + nudges), and details scope control. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with front-loaded instruction, clear formatting for scope options, and no wasted words. Slightly longer than necessary but still efficient.

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 existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and most parameters. The omission of 'k' is a minor gap, but overall the agent can use this tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description explains 'query' and 'scope' in detail, but the 'k' parameter (integer, default 6) is completely undocumented. This partial coverage justifies a midpoint score.

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 it retrieves a compact memory brief and should be called at the start of every conversation. It distinguishes between first and mid-session calls via scope, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'context'.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call at the start of every conversation and provides detailed guidance on when to use 'full' vs 'query' scope, including how to pass the user's first message as query. Offers clear usage rules.

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