Confirm behavior correction

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

Discloses side effects beyond the idempotentHint annotation: 'writes a correction memory and refreshes the persona.' This gives the agent a clear understanding of what happens on confirmation.

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?

Two concise sentences that convey purpose, source, and effects without extraneous detail. Well-structured and easy to parse.

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 simple tool, the description is complete: it specifies the input source, the action, and the effects. No missing information that would prevent an agent from using it correctly.

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 argument 'id' is well described both in the schema and the tool description as 'Correction ID (from memory_pending)'. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description reinforces the source.

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?

States a specific action ('Confirm') on a specific resource ('pending behavior correction') and clearly describes the effects. Differentiates from sibling tools by referencing corrections.json and memory_pending entries.

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?

Provides context on when to use: for pending corrections from memory_extract rule mode, with ID from memory_pending. Does not explicitly contrast with correction_reject but implies it by focusing on confirmation.

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