remember_observation

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the memory is stored with type='observation' and affects future retrieval scoring. Also explains scope behavior. However, it does not mention side effects like overwriting or conflict resolution.

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 paragraph with clear structure using capitalized cues like 'USE THIS WHEN' and 'PREFER THIS'. It conveys necessary information without excessive fluff, though some sentences could be streamlined.

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 and 6 parameters (3 required), the description covers purpose, usage, and key behavioral aspects. It lacks explanation of tags and project parameters but is otherwise complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate. It explains scope parameter in detail and mentions that facts are 'atomic facts', but does not clarify tags, project, or the exact format of title and narrative.

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?

Description clearly states 'Record a structured observation extracted from a session' and differentiates from sibling tool 'remember' by specifying that this tool is for multi-faceted events while 'remember' is for polished single-fact memories.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('USE THIS WHEN: capturing a multi-faceted event') and when not to use ('Use the simpler remember(content, type=...) only for polished single-fact memories'). Provides clear alternatives.

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