memory_promote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It reveals nothing about side effects, whether the operation mutates state, requires permissions, or returns anything. The term 'promote' is ambiguous and unexplained.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. A single phrase that repeats the tool name provides no functional information and fails to earn 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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description must provide essential context about purpose and behavior. It does not, leaving the tool completely undecipherable. Sibling tools hint at a memory domain, but the text offers no explanation of what 'promote' means.

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 input schema is an empty object with zero parameters, so there are no parameters to document. Baseline 4 applies because the schema already covers all parameter aspects and there is nothing additional to explain.

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 'memory promote' simply restates the tool name without any verb or resource, providing no indication of what the tool actually does. It is a tautology and does not distinguish from sibling tools like memory_search or memory_propose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about use cases, prerequisites, or circumstances that would warrant calling memory_promote instead of its siblings.

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