ingest

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It details how files are processed (YAML frontmatter overrides, JSON array shape), recursion behavior, and the return summary (stored, skipped, errors). This gives the agent a solid understanding of what the tool does beyond the raw schema.

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 well-structured with clear sections (intro, formats, args, returns). While detailed, every sentence earns its place and there is no redundancy. It front-loads the main purpose and then organizes supporting details logically.

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 (multiple formats, options, recursion), the description is complete. It covers all inputs, behaviors, and return values. The output summary is mentioned, and the schema adds further specificity. It is fully adequate for agent invocation.

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 description provides an 'Args:' section that describes every parameter beyond the schema: path is absolute/relative, project/scope are overridden by frontmatter, source is a label for all memories, and recursive defaults to true. This adds substantial meaning to the bare schema entries.

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 'Bulk-load memories from a file or directory,' with specific verbs ('load') and resources ('memories'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'store' (which presumably handles single memories) by emphasizing bulk ingestion from files/directories.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool—when you have memories in a file/directory. It explains supported formats and recursion behavior, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing to 'store' for individual memories.

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