import_memory

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses all behavioral traits: read-only source, no network/auth, idempotency, deduplication by source ID or content hash, provenance stamping, and that imported items are not auto-promoted. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections, but slightly verbose. Front-loads purpose and constraints. Each sentence is valuable, but minor redundancy in parameter explanations could be trimmed.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameters, behavioral nuances, idempotency, provenance, and return format. Output schema exists, so return description is sufficient. Complete for its complexity.

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 0%, but description compensates fully by defining each parameter: 'source' explains the 'json' adapter format and structure, 'path' specifies local file path. Adds critical meaning beyond schema.

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 it ingests external memory exports as provenance-tagged items, distinguishing itself from sibling tools like 'capture' (native capture) and 'distill' (substrate reading). Clearly identifies it as an import/ingest-only, read-only operation.

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 context: read-only on source, idempotent, no auto-promotion, and local file path only. Lacks explicit exclusion guidance or when to use alternatives like 'capture', but the context is sufficient for correct usage.

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