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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears transparency. It details permanent storage, namespacing, semantic indexing, the supersedes effect (excluded from search but visible in export), and the payment mechanism. No contradictions with absent 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?

The description is a single paragraph that front-loads the purpose. Each sentence adds unique information (purpose, scope, supersede behavior, payment). No wasted words, though slightly longer than necessary. Efficient for the amount of detail.

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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers core behavioral aspects well: permanent storage, namespacing, indexing, supersedes, and payment. It lacks return value details and error handling but is comprehensive for a write tool.

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 schema has 67% description coverage, with content and supersedes already described. The description adds context for supersedes (effect) and mentions semantic indexing, but does not elaborate on tags or provide new parameter semantics beyond what the schema offers. Moderate value.

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 clearly states 'Store a memory permanently' with a specific verb and resource. It adds scope ('Namespaced to YOUR paying wallet') and distinguishes this paid version from alternatives via the payment mention, differentiating it from siblings like memory_write_free.

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 outlines what the tool does (store permanently, searchable, supersede) and mentions it is paid, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus sibling tools like memory_write_free or memory_import. It implies usage for permanent storage but lacks when-not-to-use guidance.

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