profile_hipocampo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool saves data in memory_items and the type of data, but it does not mention whether updates overwrite or append, or any side effects. For a basic save operation, the explanation is adequate but lacks depth.

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 two paragraphs with front-loaded purpose and differentiation. It is efficient but slightly verbose with the Spanish phrasing; however, every sentence adds value. Minor improvement could be more brevity, but overall well-structured.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no enums, and an output schema (implied by the return description). The description covers usage, parameter semantics, and return value ('Confirmación con el ID asignado'). For a simple save tool, it is complete and leaves no critical gaps.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It fully explains each parameter: summary as a short personal data text with an example, extra as optional additional plain text, and categories as optional categories with an example. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 saves personal profile data in Hipocampo's memory_items. It uses a specific verb ('guarda') and resource ('dato de perfil personal'), and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling save_hipocampo, which stores technical vector 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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance by contrasting with save_hipocampo, noting that this tool is for personal data (gustos, familia, preferencias, datos biográficos). It clearly indicates the context where this tool should be chosen over its sibling.

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