memory_save

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states 'Save to persistent memory' without mentioning whether saving overwrites, appends, or handles duplicates, nor any side effects like potential mutation of existing data.

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 single sentence is brief but under-specifies the tool's functionality. True conciseness would retain essential detail; here, the description is too terse to be adequately informative.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is wholly inadequate. It fails to explain what 'persistent memory' is, how the tool relates to siblings, or what happens after saving.

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 description coverage, the description must explain parameters. It does not clarify the purpose of 'key', 'tags', 'value', or 'source', leaving the agent to infer their meaning from names alone.

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 'Save to persistent memory' uses a specific verb (save) and resource (persistent memory), clearly indicating the action. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools like memory_search or compare_sources, though the verb itself implies a distinct operation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., memory_search). The description provides no context for appropriate usage, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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