logicmem_memory_log

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the memory is permanent and searchable, which are key traits. However, it omits potential side effects, limits, or error behavior, leaving some uncertainty for a write operation.

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 short sentences deliver the core purpose and key usage advice with no filler. The message is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 memory-write tool, the description adequately covers what it does and how to use it. It doesn't mention return values or error conditions, but no output schema exists and the schema already documents parameters, so the description is sufficient for typical agent interactions.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful guidance for the 'text' parameter by advising to include who, what, when, why, which enriches the schema's minimal 'What to remember' beyond a literal reading.

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 opens with 'Store a new memory', clearly specifying the action (store) and resource (memory). This distinguishes it from siblings like recall (retrieve) and stats (query), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 clear context: memory is permanent and searchable across sessions, and advises to include who, what, when, why. This helps the agent decide when to store meaningful details, though it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like recall or outcome.

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