Remember

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

The description discloses it is a write operation ('MID-SESSION WRITE') and emphasizes the need to invoke the tool rather than just saying it. However, it does not describe side effects, idempotency, storage behavior, or error handling. No annotations are provided to supplement.

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 sentence with a clarifying prefix in brackets. It is concise and front-loaded with the operation type and usage trigger. The prefix might be slightly cryptic but still effective.

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 when to use, but lacks details on return behavior (no output schema) and does not explain what happens on success or failure. Given the tool's simplicity, it is adequate but has gaps.

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 67% (2 of 3 params have descriptions). The tool description does not add parameter information beyond the schema, but the schema itself provides adequate detail for 'content' and 'context'. The 'project' parameter lacks description but has a default.

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 explicitly states 'single fact/decision' and 'use when the user asks to remember' with specific verbs (store, note, save). It distinguishes from sibling tools 'check' and 'recall' which are likely read operations.

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 clearly states when to use ('when the user asks to remember, store, note, or save a specific decision, fact, or insight') and implies not for reads. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but the context signals provide sibling names.

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