save_prompt_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'saves' but does not mention whether it overwrites existing patterns, requires authentication, or has side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely short (one sentence), which makes it concise but overly terse for a tool with 8 parameters. It sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, leaving many aspects unexplained.

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 tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description should at least outline what happens when a pattern is saved. It lacks information about persistence, scope, or how patterns are retrieved later, which is crucial for an agent invoking this tool.

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 schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no additional meaning for any parameter. It does not explain the purpose of fields like 'project_id', 'owner_id', or 'embedding'. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of context.

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 useful prompts and response patterns, which is a specific verb-resource pair. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like save_file_memory or save_cross_interface_decision, though the focus on 'prompts' and 'patrones de respuesta' provides some implicit distinction.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no indication of prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it. For a tool that saves structured data, context on usage context is missing.

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