vault_mem_save

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

Since there are no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It effectively communicates critical behavioral traits—deduplication and topic indexing—which are key operational details not captured in the schema alone.

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 tool is summarized in a single, highly efficient sentence. Every word—including the technical terms like 'episodic' and 'indexing'—serves a distinct and essential purpose.

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 a high complexity (8 parameters, specific memory types, scopes), but the single sentence only provides a high-level overview. It fails to provide context for the interplay between complex fields like 'topic' vs 'topic_key' or the specific implications of 'deduplication'.

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 description coverage is 100%, meaning the schema handles all parameter definitions. The description does not add unique semantic meaning beyond listing the resource management functions.

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 specific language ('Save,' 'episodic observation memory') and explicitly states high-value features ('deduplication,' 'topic indexing'), clearly defining the resource and its unique capability.

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?

While the description defines what the tool saves, it offers no guidance on when to use `vault_mem_save` versus the many similar memory saving tools in the sibling list (e.g., `save_entry`, `save_artifact`). There are no 'when' or 'when not' criteria provided.

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