memory_reinforce

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing the mutation of edge weights and the idempotence property within a session. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 concise, using two sentences to convey purpose, behavior, and usage condition without any redundant or extraneous information.

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's simplicity (one parameter with full schema coverage, output schema present), the description is complete, covering when to use, what it does, and behavioral specifics like idempotence.

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 single parameter is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), and the tool description adds minimal additional semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Boost Hebbian edges') and resource ('among co-retrieved record ids'), and explicitly mentions mutation. It effectively distinguishes from sibling memory tools by specifying the reinforcement function.

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 condition for use ('Use when two records co-answered'), but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools, which would have increased clarity.

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