tcai_memory_store

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'attention-gated' and 'salience-indexed' processing, but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or constraints like memory capacity. Behavioral traits beyond the core action are absent.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and object. No superfluous words, but could be slightly more informative without harming conciseness.

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 complexity of emotional memory and many sibling tools, the description is minimal. No output schema, no return value explanation. Adequate for a storage-only tool but could provide more context about memory integration.

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 description coverage is 83%, so parameters are mostly documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond labeling the mechanism ('attention-gated, salience-indexed'). Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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's action ('Store an experience') and specifies the domain ('emotional memory') with qualifiers ('attention-gated, salience-indexed'). It distinguishes from sibling tcai_memory_retrieve, which retrieves 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or alternatives. The purpose implies use for storing emotional experiences, but no when-not or prerequisites are mentioned. Sibling names suggest related tools, but the description does not direct agents.

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