hebbrix_import

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

The description details accepted data types, transformation rules (e.g., bullets stripped, non-heading lines become memories), and return format, adding substantial behavioral context beyond the sparse annotations.

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?

Concise and front-loaded, with each sentence adding value. The description is free of fluff while covering critical usage details.

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?

Covers the primary input formats and return values, but the lack of documentation for `collection_id` and `wait_for_index` leaves minor gaps. Given the output schema exists and the main parameter is well-covered, it's mostly 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?

The `data` parameter is thoroughly explained with multiple accepted formats and transformations, but `collection_id` and `wait_for_index` are not described at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates strongly for one parameter but ignores the other two.

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 'Import memories into a collection' and identifies itself as the inverse of hebbrix_export, distinguishing it from siblings. It also lists concrete use cases like restoring a backup, migrating, and seeding from notes.

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?

Explicitly provides use cases and positions itself against hebbrix_export, giving clear context for when to use it. However, it doesn't mention alternatives for similar operations (e.g., hebbrix_remember) or state when NOT to use it.

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