remember

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'Fully local', 'embeds the text with a local model and writes it to a local SQLite file', and 'No LLM call, no network', providing transparency about side effects and operational behavior. It does not describe the return value, but an output schema exists.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence summary, a brief technical note, and an Args list. Every sentence is purposeful and there is no fluff.

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?

For a simple memory store, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameters. The sibling tools and the straightforward nature of the operation make it sufficiently complete.

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 schema provides only names and types with no descriptions, but the 'Args' section adds full meaning: 'content' as the text to remember, and 'user_id' as a namespace with default 'default' and guidance to use per end-user. This substantially enriches the 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 'Store a fact or note in long-term memory' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (recall, forget, reset_memories) by focusing on the write operation.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this whenever the user tells you something worth remembering across sessions' with concrete examples. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, so it falls short of a 5.

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