apply_memory_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses persistence and initialization of various components, but lacks details on destructiveness (e.g., overwriting existing config), error conditions, or required permissions.

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 waste. Key information is front-loaded: agent-driven, apply config, list of actions, hot reload. Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity (8 params, no output schema), the description covers the main effect adequately. It lacks details on return values and error handling, but the core purpose is clearly communicated.

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?

All 8 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, merely referencing the overall action of persisting config.

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 starts with a clear verb ('Apply') and specific resource ('memory configuration'), listing concrete actions: persist config, initialize directories, ChromaDB, SQLite. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'strata_init' or 'memorize' by focusing on configuration application.

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 implies usage when needing to apply a memory configuration and highlights hot reload support, but it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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