store_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the categories but does not mention persistence, side effects, auth requirements, or return values. For a write operation, this leaves significant behavioral traits undisclosed.

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 and well-structured, with the main action stated first followed by a bulleted list of category options. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easy to scan.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings and does not describe what happens after storing, but for a basic store operation the provided category breakdown is a helpful addition.

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 schema provides zero description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the meaning of the 'category' parameter by listing the three allowed values (episodic, semantic, procedural) with examples. However, it does not explain the 'content' parameter beyond its name, leaving one parameter somewhat under-specified.

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 stores a memory, specifying the verb 'Stores' and the resource 'memory'. It further distinguishes the operation from siblings (recall, verify) by the action of storing, and provides category details that make the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives context for which category to use (episodic, semantic, procedural) but does not explicitly compare this tool with its siblings (recall_memory, verify_history). There are no exclusions or conditions for when not to use this tool, so usage guidance is limited to category selection.

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