promemoria_aggiungi

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing that this is a write operation, and it does state that it adds content. It does not describe side effects, persistence, or return behavior, but for a simple add tool the core mutation is clear.

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 two short sentences with the action and intended user triggers front-loaded. Every clause earns its place; there is no redundant restating of the tool name.

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?

For a one-parameter add tool, the description adequately covers what it does and when to invoke it. It does not describe the expected response or any limitations, but there is no output schema and the operation is simple enough that this is a minor omission.

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 0% but there is only one required string parameter, 'testo'. The description maps it to the semantic content: the thing to remember or the shopping product. Although it does not name the parameter, the role is unambiguous from the tool's own sentence.

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 uses a specific verb ('Aggiunge') and identifies the two resources: a thing to remember and a shopping-list item. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools promemoria_elenco and promemoria_rimuovi, which handle listing and removal.

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?

It gives explicit trigger conditions: use it when the user asks to remember something, jot something down, or add a product to the shopping list. It does not explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives, but the sibling names make the contrast obvious.

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