knowmind_store_memory

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

Discloses append-only nature, idempotent detection for hashed content, multi-store persistence (Postgres, vector index, graph), and required scope. Adds context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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?

Description is a focused single paragraph front-loading the 'what', with no filler. Could be slightly more structured but still 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 purpose, usage, behavior, return value, and required scope. Lacks error handling details but sufficient for a memory-storage tool given schema richness.

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 coverage is high (80%+), so description adds limited extra meaning. It mentions append-only and idempotency but duplicates schema info for most parameters. 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 ('Speichere') and resource ('Erkenntnisse') and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like knowmind_update_fact for updates and knowmind_recall for retrieval.

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?

It states when to use ('sobald sie entstehen') and when not ('gleicher Titel ersetzt NICHTS, dafür knowmind_update_fact'), with explicit alternatives and idempotency behavior.

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