logicmem_memory_outcome

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the high-level action, omitting side effects (e.g., model updates), required permissions, idempotency, rate limits, or what happens on failure. The feedback pipeline implication is hinted but not detailed.

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, no fluff, and front-loaded. However, extreme brevity sacrifices essential details, making it more underspecified than concise. A balanced tool description would add parameter context while remaining succinct.

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?

Given no output schema, 0% parameter coverage, and no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate context for correct invocation. Agent lacks understanding of input semantics, expected outputs, and error states, making tool usage unreliable.

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 0%, meaning the description adds no parameter explanation beyond the schema. The parameters memory_ids, success, and magnitude lack semantic context: what constitutes a 'useful' memory, how magnitude affects training, or how to source valid memory_ids. Agent cannot infer correct usage.

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 verb 'record' and resource 'whether a stored memory was useful'. It also specifies the downstream purpose 'Feeds the DPO training pipeline', distinguishing it from sibling tools like logicmem_memory_log or logicmem_memory_recall.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings, nor any prerequisites or conditions for invocation. The description does not specify that this should be called only after a memory is retrieved and evaluated, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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