decision_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. 'Create' implies persistence, and the rationale requirement is stated, but side effects, failure modes, and whether it overwrites or rejects duplicates are not disclosed.

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 concise and direct, using only two sentences and no filler or redundant detail.

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?

The description lacks parameter definitions, return-value expectations, and any usage context about when decision memories are appropriate. Though an output schema is indicated as present, the description itself provides minimal context beyond the core creation action.

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 zero description coverage, and the description does not define the parameters. While names like title, tags, and rationale are self-explanatory, fields such as statement, details, project, and especially alternatives remain ambiguous—alternatives is an array of string-valued objects with no explanation of its intended structure.

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 creates a decision memory, using the specific verb 'Create' and the resource 'decision memory'. This distinguishes it from the many sibling create tools for other memory types.

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?

It gives one useful usage directive: 'Always provide rationale explaining WHY.' However, it does not explicitly indicate when to prefer this tool over generic memory_create_tool or other specialized create tools.

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