Remember

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that storage is to 'persistent encrypted memory' and 'across sessions,' disclosing durability and security traits beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and the second provides the use case, ensuring front-loading of key information.

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 one-parameter tool with annotations and output schema, the description covers the core purpose, usage context, and key behavioral traits (persistence, encryption). It does not mention size limits or response structure, but output schema likely covers return values.

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% for the single 'content' parameter, with description 'Information to remember.' The description adds context about what constitutes information ('fact, decision, or piece of context'), but does not add significant syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('SAIHM persistent encrypted memory'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like saihm_recall (retrieval) and saihm_forget (deletion). It explicitly states the use case: persisting facts, decisions, or context across sessions.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this when an agent or user wants a fact, decision, or piece of context to persist across sessions,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient given sibling tool names.

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