mnemonic_pin

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 behavioral consequences of pinning (no decay, search prioritization, premium feature), which adds value beyond the schema. It doesn't detail return values or errors, but the operation is simple and reversible.

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, front-loaded with the action, and uses bullet points to convey additional consequences without unnecessary wording. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple toggle operation and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and behavioral implications. It could mention side effects like reversibility or authentication, but these are implied by 'pin or unpin'.

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 100%, with both `id` and `pinned` described clearly. The description doesn't add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Pin or unpin a memory' with a specific verb and resource, and the bullet points explain the effects of pinning (decay prevention, search priority). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update or delete.

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 provides clear context for when pinning is useful (critical information, user preferences) and implies the action of toggling. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or reference alternatives, but the use case is well defined enough.

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