update_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool patches metadata and optionally replaces content, which is a mutation operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permissions needed, or whether previous versions are preserved, leaving gaps in behavioral understanding.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides critical sibling guidance. Highly efficient and 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and high schema coverage, the description covers the essential behavior: patching metadata and optionally replacing content. It directs to the correct sibling for incremental updates. However, it could be improved by mentioning that the id must refer to an existing memory, though this is implied.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the meta parameter is a partial patch and content is a full replacement. It also contrasts with append_memory, helping the agent decide when to use each parameter. This extra context elevates the score above baseline.

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 patches memory metadata and optionally replaces the full markdown body. The verb 'patch' is specific, and the mention of 'optionally replace' differentiates from incremental updates. Explicitly references sibling tool append_memory for incremental observations, distinguishing this tool's purpose.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to use append_memory for incremental observations, indicating when not to use this tool. However, it does not address other sibling tools like archive_memory or delete_memory, which could provide more complete usage context.

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