decompose_and_store

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the core behavior (decompose, store, infer edges) and return value, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or error handling. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states the action, second sentence provides usage guidance and return value. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 tool's high-level purpose, return value, and usage examples. It does not explain 'atomic memory nodes' or the format of the subgraph, but is otherwise complete for a tool with no output schema.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions with 100% coverage. The tool's description repeats the schema information without adding new details about parameter formats or constraints. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: breaking content into atomic memory nodes, storing them, and creating inferred edges. It distinguishes from siblings like store_node (single node storage) and store_edge (edge creation) by performing both actions automatically.

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 explicitly says 'Use for notes, summaries, or multi-fact passages,' providing clear context. However, it does not exclude cases where a simpler tool (e.g., store_node) would be more appropriate, nor explicitly name alternatives.

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