memory_learn

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

The description discloses auto-categorization and tagging behavior, but without annotations, it does not cover side effects, permissions, or destructive potential. For a tool with no annotations, more detail is needed.

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 well-structured with a summary and Arg list, front-loading the purpose. It is slightly longer than necessary but remains clear and effective.

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?

With 5 parameters fully explained and an output schema presumably provided, the description is largely complete. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., memory system state) but is sufficient for use.

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 description includes an 'Args' section that explains each parameter in detail, adding meaning beyond the schema's titles. Given the 0% schema description coverage, this fully compensates and provides clear parameter semantics.

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 states 'Save a lesson or compile a skill from content,' which clearly defines the verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like memory_save or memory_compile_skill, which may cause confusion.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions optional skill compilation but does not provide context for choosing this over memory_save for lessons or memory_compile_skill for skills.

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