marm_log_entry

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: entries are stored with date/topic/summary, session switching via prefix, auto-tagging of date, and storage as semantic memories for recall. It also notes return values.

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 somewhat lengthy but well-structured with bullet points and clear sections. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded. It could be slightly more concise, but it effectively communicates necessary 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?

Given no output schema and low schema coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining return values, complex session-switching behavior, and storage side-effects. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly without additional references.

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%, so the description must fully define parameters. It explains that 'entry' is the text to log with optional prefixes for session/topic switching, and 'session_name' is an optional override. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 the tool writes a log entry to the active session, specifying the resource (log entry, active session) and verb (write). It distinguishes from siblings like marm_log_show (read) and marm_smart_recall (recall), which have different verbs.

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 explains when to use the tool (to write a log entry) and gives detailed formatting and session-switching rules. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the context from sibling names implies this.

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