remember

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the data is saved to 'persistent memory,' indicating it persists across sessions. However, it does not disclose details like whether duplicates are avoided or if there are limits. The behavior is adequately but minimally described.

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 concise: four sentences front-load the purpose, then provide usage guidance, then parameter details. No fluff or redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (two parameters) and presence of an output schema, the description covers key aspects: purpose, when to use, and parameter meanings. It does not describe return values, but the output schema presumably handles that.

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 description adds significant value beyond the schema: for 'text', it explains what to store; for 'category', it lists the valid options and default. Since schema coverage is 0%, this fully compensates and clarifies usage.

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 action ('Save'), the resource ('a fact, observation, or piece of context'), and the destination ('persistent memory'). It effectively differentiates from siblings like 'recall' and 'forget' by specifying this tool is for storing information.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when you learn something important about the user...' giving clear context for usage. It does not provide explicit exclusions or mention alternatives, but the sibling list implies other tools serve different purposes.

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