memory_review

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

Describes actions and their effects (approve bumps verification, reject marks superseded, correct stores new fact). No annotations provided, so description carries burden; lacks detail on data persistence or undo, but covers core behavior.

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?

Compact single paragraph covering purpose, prerequisite, actions, and key constraints. No wasted words, but could benefit from bullet points for easier scanning.

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?

Adequately covers tool purpose, actions, required params, and special cases (daemon dependency, deprecated fields). Missing output description (no output schema), but actions are well-defined.

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% and description enhances each parameter with clear context: default limit, action enum values explained, deprecated params noted as no-op, and required fields for actions spelled out.

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?

Clearly states it triages auto-captured facts from daemon/system, lists four specific actions, and distinguishes from sibling tools by targeting daemon/system-captured facts rather than general 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 the tool is useful ('only when daemon is running'), warns of empty list otherwise, and describes each action's purpose and prerequisites (e.g., reason for reject, corrected_content for correct).

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