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

Annotations already indicate it is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive. Description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permissions). Adequate but no extra value beyond 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 concise sentences, front-loaded with verb and purpose. No wasted words. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose (what it does, what it doesn't).

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 6 parameters (1 required), output schema exists, and many sibling tools, the description is sufficiently complete. It clarifies the tool's niche without needing longer explanation. Slightly lacking on what exactly 'record' means in terms of storage/retrieval, but acceptable.

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%, so parameters are fully documented. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Record' and specific resources: 'significant session event, milestone, decision, or handoff note'. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'remember' by noting it is not for durable facts/preferences.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use ('Not for durable facts/preferences') and suggests alternative ('use remember'). Also hints at context ('useful for reconstructing recent work').

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