feedback_memory

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

Discloses that feedback improves future recall quality and explains enum effects ('useful boosts ranking, irrelevant reduces it'). However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not address potential side effects (e.g., irreversibility, multiple feedbacks).

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose and benefit, with no extraneous information.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage timing, and basic effects. Minor gaps: does not mention if feedback is reversible or tied to a user.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the signal enum further: 'For skills, "useful" boosts confidence, "irrelevant" reduces it.' This goes beyond the schema's description.

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?

Explicitly states the action ('signal whether a recalled memory was useful or irrelevant') and the resource (memories). Distinguishes from sibling tools like recall_memories and save_correction.

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?

Provides clear usage context: 'Use after recalling memories to indicate which were helpful vs noise.' Implies when not to use (before recalling), but does not mention alternatives or exclusions.

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