marrow_import_memories

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

The description mentions 'merge (dedup)' and 'replace' modes, which hints at behavior, but it does not explain what replace actually does (e.g., destructive effects, whether existing memories are deleted) or any other side effects. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and falls short.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the action and key modes.

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 tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and modes. However, it lacks any mention of return values, idempotency, or potential side effects beyond 'replace', leaving gaps for an agent to handle.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the 'merge' mode as deduping, which provides more semantic meaning than the schema's simple 'Import mode' label.

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 uses a specific verb ('Import') with a clear resource ('memories') and distinguishes between merge and replace modes. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like export_memories or retrieve_memories.

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 usage context is implied by the name and description (importing memories), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like update_memory or delete_memory. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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