hebbrix_update

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

No annotations, so description carries the load. It discloses non-destructive behavior via version history, read-after-write guarantees, and the ability to opt out with wait_for_index=False. This is valuable context beyond the schema. Could mention more about importance but overall strong.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then flag explanation. No 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?

Description covers purpose, usage, key behavioral nuances, and enough parameter context for a simple update tool. Output schema covers return values, so no need to explain that. Lacks only the importance parameter documentation, which is a minor gap.

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 description must explain params. It explains content ('pass the new content') and wait_for_index in detail, but memory_id is implied by the tool name and importance is entirely undocumented. This is a partial compensation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool updates an existing memory in place, preserves version history, and explicitly distinguishes from remembering a contradicting copy. The verb 'update' specifies the action and resource.

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 instructs to use for correcting a stored fact rather than creating a duplicate memory, also explains the wait_for_index flag for synchronous vs fire-and-forget behavior. This gives clear when-to-use guidance.

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