vigile_remember

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses idempotency ('idempotent write path') and boundedness, but lacks details on side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if an episode with the same idempotency_key already exists.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and a key behavior. No extraneous words.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is too brief to cover important usage context such as parameter semantics, return values, error handling, or prerequisites. A more detailed description is needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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 input schema has 50% description coverage (4 out of 8 parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no parameter-specific information; it only provides general context. This does not compensate for the missing parameter descriptions in the schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'Record a bounded security memory episode for future recall', specifying a verb and resource. The phrase 'idempotent write path' distinguishes it from sibling tools like vigile_recall, which likely retrieves episodes.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are given. The sibling tool names and the description imply that vigile_remember is for recording while vigile_recall is for retrieval, but the description does not explicitly guide the agent on choosing between them.

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