remember

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates persistence, but not whether storing appends or overwrites, what response is returned, whether duplicates are handled, or what side effects occur. The schema adds some behavioral details, but the tool description itself is thin.

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?

Two short, economical sentences. The action is front-loaded ('Store a memory') and the persistence behavior follows immediately. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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?

Minimally viable: the purpose and persistence semantics are clear, and the schema fully documents all seven parameters. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not state what callers receive on success or what failure modes exist, leaving the overall context incomplete for a richer invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline applies. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema richly documents each parameter, including category defaults, confidence ranges, and source_url verification behavior.

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 uses a specific verb ('Store') and resource ('a memory for AI agents'), and explicitly adds the persistence trait. It clearly conveys a create/write operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like update, recall, or forget.

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?

'Persists information across sessions' gives clear contextual guidance: use this tool when information should survive beyond the current session. However, it does not name alternatives or provide explicit when-not-to-use exclusions.

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