reasoning_save

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'persist' without disclosing side effects, permissions requirements, overwrite behavior, or what happens to unsaved data. Remaining parameters like ttl_days and project are not explained.

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 is concise but lacks structure; no parameter list, examples, or separate sections. Every word earns its place, but more detail could be added without bloating.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits how saved traces are retrieved, what happens on duplicate goals, and how parameters like ttl_days affect persistence.

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 only 43% (3/7 parameters have descriptions). The description adds no extra meaning to parameters, leaving the agent to infer roles of goal, steps, conclusion, and optional fields from name alone.

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 'persist', resource 'reasoning trace', and components (goal, steps, conclusion). Distinguishes from siblings reasoning_list and reasoning_search which are for listing and searching saved traces.

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?

Implies usage for saving reasoning traces, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor any when-not conditions or prerequisites.

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