agent_remember

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=true), and the description adds context beyond them: persistence across MCP sessions, encrypted on-disk storage, that overwriting the same key destroys the prior value, and the exact success return string.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then usage constraints, then behavioral notes; every clause carries information (persistence, secrecy exclusion, idempotency, return value) with no filler.

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?

A two-parameter, no-output-schema tool whose full behavioral contract — storage location, persistence, mutation semantics, return value, and correct-vs-wrong usage — is stated, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 100% and both parameters are documented there, including a naming convention. The description adds no syntax or format detail for key/value, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Persist a non-secret key/value note in encrypted, on-disk agent memory') and immediately distinguishes itself from set_secret and the chat scratchpad, so an agent can identify it without opening schemas.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use examples ('last rotation date for a key', 'deployment preferences', 'decisions taken in earlier sessions'), an explicit when-not ('do NOT use this to store secrets'), and names the alternative tools (`set_secret`, chat scratchpad) with the condition that selects each.

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