ingestSessionEvents

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

Despite annotations already indicating idempotency and non-destructiveness, the description adds critical behavioral details: writes immediately in a single transaction, re-ingestion of same (sessionId, eventIndex) is a no-op, and safe retries. This goes beyond annotations and provides full transparency.

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 well-structured with clear sections, uses bullet points effectively, and each sentence adds value. It is concise for the amount of information provided, but slightly lengthy due to detailed guidelines.

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 no output schema, the description fails to mention return values or error handling. It covers input, behavior, use cases, and limits well, but the lack of output/response information leaves the agent uncertain about success confirmation.

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 coverage, the description compensates by explaining each event field: id (unique), eventIndex (monotonic 0-based), eventType with examples, payloadJson as JSON string. However, it omits details about 'createdAt' and maxLength constraints, leaving some semantic gaps.

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 uses a specific verb 'Push' and resource 'raw session events' to sessionmem, and explains its purpose for summarization and analytics. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like storeMemory by clarifying that these events are transient raw material, not first-class 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 call (periodically during session or batch before end) and when not to call (for durable facts, use storeMemory). Also provides limits (max 500 events per call) and retry safety, guiding the agent on proper usage.

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