update_memory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It notes that modifying content triggers re-embedding, a useful behavioral detail. However, it does not clarify if updates are partial or full replacement, nor mention authorization or side effects beyond re-embedding.

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?

Single sentence with a clear verb and list of modifiable attributes. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the action.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return value. None provided. Lacks information on whether the tool returns the updated memory, confirmation message, or nothing. Also missing prerequisites or permission requirements.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by highlighting that content change triggers re-embedding and listing modifiable fields, providing context beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 name 'update_memory' and description clearly state the verb and resource. It lists specific modifiable fields, distinguishing it from siblings like save_memory (create) and delete_memory (delete).

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 implies use for existing memories by requiring an 'id', but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives (e.g., save_memory for new, search for retrieval). No when-not-to-use guidance.

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