save

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It mentions 'same validation and redaction as push' but does not detail what that entails or describe side effects like data mutation. Adds some context but not fully transparent.

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. First sentence states purpose, second provides construction guidance and usage comparison. Efficiently 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?

With 2 parameters, nested object, and no output schema, the description clarifies packet content expectations and references sibling 'push'. It could mention the tool's role in the session management suite but is mostly complete.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaning: it explains that 'packet' should be built from the active conversation with specific fields, and clarifies the role of 'allow_unredacted' in skipping redaction pre-flight.

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 a session as a Core Memory Packet. It distinguishes from the sibling 'push' by specifying the intent: 'persist my session' vs 'ship a pre-built packet'. This provides a clear verb+resource and differentiation.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'when the intent is persist my session'. It contrasts with 'push' and mentions building the packet from the active conversation. It does not list exclusions but provides clear context.

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