mem_note_create

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral context (indexed, eligible for context packs), but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, permissions, or limits. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

A single sentence conveying the core purpose and key behaviors without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has six parameters (two required), no output schema, and no annotations. The description only covers high-level purpose, leaving parameter meanings and return behavior completely unspecified.

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?

The description provides no explanation of any of the six parameters (project_key, text, session_id, title, tags, importance). With 0% schema coverage, the agent relies solely on the description, which is insufficient.

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 'Create one manual operational memory note', specifying the verb and resource. It also adds key behaviors: 'indexed for mem_search' and 'eligible for context packs', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like mem_get (retrieve) or mem_bootstrap_context (setup).

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 that this tool is appropriate when the goal is to create a note that will be searchable and included in context packs. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or compare with similar siblings like mem_open_work, so some guidance is missing.

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