logicmem_a2a_write_shared

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it merely states 'Write a memory' without detailing side effects, overwrite semantics, permissions, or impacts on existing shared memory. The write operation's implications (e.g., privacy, category usage) are not conveyed.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified to the point of being minimally informative. It is appropriately front-loaded but does not fully earn its place given the tool's complexity.

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?

This tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a sparse description. The description is far too minimal to support correct invocation, especially when sibling tools differ subtly in purpose. It fails to provide essential context for 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter meaning. It does not explain what agent_id, client_id, text, tags, category, importance, or is_private represent in the A2A context, leaving the agent to infer from names alone.

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 ('Write') and names the resource ('memory to the shared A2A pool'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory_recall (read) or a2a_sync. However, it does not elaborate on what 'memory' encompasses beyond the basic write action, leaving some ambiguity.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as logicmem_a2a_sync or logicmem_memory_log. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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