remember

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by disclosing non-idempotency (calling twice creates two memories), eviction behavior under max_memories, and the permanent nature of pinning with no unpin mechanism. These are valuable behavioral traits not evident from the annotation hints.

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 moderately sized but every sentence contributes meaningful information: purpose, return value, dedup behavior, eviction, and pinning permanence. It is front-loaded with the action and result, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 the presence of an output schema and detailed parameter schema, the description covers all necessary behavioral edge cases and context: return id, duplicate creation, eviction, and pinning. No important gaps are evident.

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 already provides thorough descriptions for both text and pinned, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantics by explaining the permanent effect of pinned=True and that no unpinning is possible later, which is not fully explicit in the schema. This elevates it to 4.

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 verb 'Save' and resource 'a new note to this agent's memory', and explicitly notes that it always inserts, returning the new memory's id. This distinguishes it from sibling read tools like search and recall.

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 gives clear context about when to use the tool (saving notes) and behavior to expect (always inserts, no deduplication, possible eviction), but it does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of search/recall'. The context is sufficient to infer appropriate use relative to siblings.

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