save_preference

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

Given annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description adds value by specifying durability across sessions and typical use cases. It aligns with annotations and provides behavioral context beyond what annotations offer.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence is essential.

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 tool with no output schema and 2 required params, the description covers what to save, when to save, and content guidelines. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly, though it omits what happens after saving.

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% and already describes both parameters. The description adds a guideline to keep notes short and self-contained, but does not significantly enhance understanding of the 'intent' parameter beyond the schema's detailed description.

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 persists a durable user preference across sessions, with specific examples (dietary rule, allergy, budget habit, tip default). It distinguishes from siblings like remove_preference by specifying when to save (when user states a preference).

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 explicitly says 'Save when the user states one' and advises to keep notes short and self-contained, giving clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like remove_preference.

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