remember

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

Discloses key behavior: returns CONFLICT without writing if a live memory exists for same type+entity. Also specifies content constraints. With no annotations, this is good coverage, though it doesn't mention other aspects like idempotency.

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 a single dense paragraph that is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Some slightly excessive detail could be structured, but overall very efficient.

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?

Covers input semantics, conflict behavior, and references sibling tools. Since output schema exists, lack of return value explanation is acceptable. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains all parameters: type enum values, content format (1-2 sentences, past/declarative), entity as short slug, and force as conflict resolution overwrite.

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 the tool's purpose: persisting one distilled memory after a work block. It specifies the structure of type, content, and entity, and distinguishes itself from siblings like supersede by explaining conflict resolution.

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 when to use (after completing a work block) and what to do when a conflict occurs (use supersede, ask user, or force). Provides clear alternatives.

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