write_finance_memory

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

With no annotations, description must disclose behavioral traits. It states idempotency by (kind, source, text), which is key. However, it does not mention other behaviors like persistence guarantees or error handling.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second adds critical details (idempotency, kind usage). No unnecessary words, front-loaded.

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 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It explains kind but omits metadata, source, db_path, and return value behavior. Could be more informative.

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 has 0% coverage. Description explains 'kind' with examples and mentions idempotency key involving text and source, but does not explain 'metadata', 'db_path', or the full semantics of 'text' and 'source'. Insufficient compensation.

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 it stores a finance memory (correction, decision, fact) with verb 'Store'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_finance_memory, list_finance_memories, and search_finance_memory.

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 mentions using 'kind' to scope memories and provides examples. Idempotency information guides safe use. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but sibling differentiation is clear.

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