akb_remember

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states memories persist across sessions, which is useful. However, it does not disclose potential limits, overwrite behavior, or privacy implications. The behavior is simple enough, so score is adequate.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a simple memory store tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains purpose, persistence, and categories. No additional details are needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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% and the description adds semantic value by explaining the meaning of each category (context, preference, etc.), which goes beyond the enum values. The content parameter is described as 'what to remember,' which is straightforward.

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 it stores something in persistent memory, and the categories list provides specific use cases. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like akb_recall and akb_forget through its purpose of storing versus retrieving or forgetting.

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 gives explicit categories (context, preference, learning, work, general) and examples of when to use it (remember important context, decisions, etc.). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though siblings imply the contrasts.

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