KIROK_retain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses deduplication logic with cosine similarity threshold, the decision to ADD/UPDATE/NOOP, auto-extraction of entities, and indexing. However, it does not mention authorization needs, rate limits, or performance implications.

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 well-structured with a concise summary, followed by detailed behavioral explanations and an Args section. While slightly lengthy, every sentence adds value; minor redundancy (e.g., repeating 'automatically') does not detract significantly.

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 (which covers return values), the description adequately covers input parameters, deduplication behavior, and auto-extraction. It does not mention output format but the schema handles that. Overall complete for a memory storage tool.

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 0%, yet the description adds significant meaning by providing examples (e.g., bank_id: 'antigravity'), clarifying content as 'The information to remember', and specifying defaults (timestamp defaults to now). This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Store new information in agent memory' and details the automatic extraction, embedding, and indexing processes. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like KIROK_forget (removal) and KIROK_recall (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?

The description implicitly indicates use for storing new information, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as KIROK_smart_retain or KIROK_update_memory. There is no mention of when not to use the tool.

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