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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), the description adds behavioral traits: key-value store scoped by agent identifier; persistent for authenticated users; 24-hour retention for anonymous sessions. No contradiction with 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?

Two short paragraphs, each sentence adds value. Front-loaded with purpose. Could combine some redundancy (e.g., 'scoped by your identifier' and later 'Authenticated users...') but overall 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?

No output schema, but description covers storage details (persistence, scoping, pairing). Sufficient for correct invocation. Lacks mention of maximum size or key naming rules, but those are implied by schema examples.

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 coverage is 100% and schema descriptions already include examples. The description rephrases key and value but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides. This matches the baseline score for full schema coverage.

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 uses specific verbs ('Save data...reuse later') and noun phrases ('cross session memory'). It lists concrete examples such as ticker, address, user preference, which make the resource clear. It also explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools recall and forget.

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 states when to use: 'when you discover something worth carrying forward'. It provides examples such as resolved ticker, target address. It also tells the agent to pair with recall for retrieval and forget for deletion, giving clear context vs. alternatives.

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