Learn

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: learned rules have highest priority and override other memories. However, it does not explain side effects, whether prior conflicting rules are overwritten or merely deprioritized, persistence duration, or how removal works.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose and priority behavior, followed by an efficient Args section. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant filler.

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 two-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, priority behavior, and parameter semantics. It does not explain how it relates to sibling tools like Remember, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates fully. It defines 'rule' with an instructive example and 'category' with its allowed values and default. This gives an agent everything needed to fill both parameters correctly.

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 verb 'Store' and the resource 'correction or rule', and it adds the defining trait that these entries have highest priority and override other memories. This distinguishes Learn from the sibling Remember behaviorally, though it does not name the alternative explicitly.

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 implies this tool is for storing persistent corrections or rules that must always be followed, but it does not explicitly state when to use Learn versus Remember or when not to use it. Usage must be inferred from the stated priority semantics rather than directly guided.

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