store_decision

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Log' implies a write operation, but the description lacks details on persistence, side effects, permissions, or reversibility. It only mentions the benefit ('invaluable for understanding past choices') without behavioral specifics.

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 plus a parameter list. Every sentence is purposeful and front-loaded with the main action. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose and parameter semantics. However, it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., project existence), return values, or how it integrates with other tools. For a simple logging tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, so the description compensates with clear explanations for each parameter (decision, rationale, alternatives, context, project). It adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb 'log' and resource 'decision' clearly state the action, and 'for future reference' adds purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like store_memory and list_decisions.

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 implies use for recording decisions and understanding past choices, but does not explicitly mention when to use it vs alternatives or when not to use it. It provides context but no exclusions.

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