Save conclusions, decisions, tasks, or opinions with author, evidence, and history; a newer status for the same author and topic replaces the previous one.
保存新结论、任务或独立观点；保留作者、证据和历史。同作者同主题任务的新状态替代旧状态。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | ||
| kind | Yes | ||
| topic | Yes | ||
| matter | Yes | ||
| status | No | ||
| evidence | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
注解已表明这是一次非破坏性写入，因此基线较低。描述增加了真正有价值的行为信息：它会保留作者、证据和历史，并且同一作者、同一主题的任务会取代先前状态。但未说明对 memory、decision 和 opinion 的去重或冲突行为，而这些类型没有所述的替换规则。
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?
两个紧凑的分句，先说明用途，再说明覆盖规则。没有填充内容，尽管这种压缩导致了未解释参数的出现。
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?
共有六个参数，其中 4 个必填，schema 描述覆盖率为 0%，且没有输出 schema。matter 和 body 参数，以及保留操作返回什么（记录 ID？），都未被解释，因此 agent 无法安全地调用或串联使用。
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 描述覆盖率为 0%，因此描述必须承担全部解释工作。它间接解释了 kind（结论、任务、观点）、topic（同一主题）、evidence（被保留）和 status（任务状态替换），但完全未说明 matter 和 body，也未说明 evidence 是指向其他记录 ID 还是其他内容。
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?
使用具体动词（保存）和明确的资源类型（结论、任务、独立观点），与 kind 枚举相呼应。表述清晰，但未提及任何同级工具（如 create_matter、register_memory_source），因此 agent 仍需自行推断它应使用哪个工具。
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?
“保存新……”暗示了创建用法，任务替换规则指明了更新场景，但未说明何时改用 create_matter、continue_matter 或 register_memory_source，也未给出前置条件或排除情形。
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.