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

Annotations indicate write operation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds behavioral context: it's a PUT, auto-keying occurs when using text shortcut, and TTL range (60 seconds to 30 days). 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?

Two concise sentences: first explains the full API call, second covers the shortcut and TTL option. Front-loaded with key action. No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the main use cases well, but does not explain the 'handle' and 'secret' parameters, which are present in the schema without descriptions. For a tool with 7 parameters (2 undocumented in schema), this gap reduces completeness given no output schema for return value hints.

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 71%. The description adds missing semantic information: explains the text shortcut defaults namespace to 'notes' and auto-generates key, and specifies TTL limits (min 60, max 30 days). This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Persist a value across your instances: PUT /memory/{ns}/{key}'. It explains the core operation of storing values under a namespace and key, and distinguishes from sibling tools like recall_memories and forget_memories by focusing on writing.

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 provides clear context on when to use the shortcut (pass text alone) and mentions optional TTL for auto-eviction. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives among the sibling list, which would improve clarity.

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