store_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'durable' and 'survive future windows', but does not disclose behavioral traits like persistence mechanism, permissions, side effects, rate limits, or whether the memory is stored in a knowledge graph. Minimal behavioral context.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and a key usage rule without any wasted words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value, error handling, or overall behavior for a complex tool. More contextual information is needed to fully guide the agent.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it focuses on high-level purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents parameters thoroughly.

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 'Store a durable memory' and lists specific use cases like stable preferences, identity facts, project entities, etc. It distinguishes from transient task state, but does not explicitly differentiate from closely related siblings like batch_store or store_case.

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 a clear negative guideline ('Do not use this for transient task state'), but lacks explicit positive guidance on when to use this tool versus specific alternatives among siblings. It implies usage for 'memory worth keeping' but does not name alternative tools for non-durable storage.

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