import_memories

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions dry-run, dedupe policies, and snapshot flags, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether duplicates are skipped or updated) or the overall behavioral impact beyond 'import'. The behavior for conflict resolution is implicit.

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 very concise: two sentences, with the first stating the core action and sources, and the second listing key features. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (7 parameters, two input modes, no output schema), the description omits return values, success/failure behavior, and details on how import conflicts are handled. For a batch import tool with potential side effects, this leaves significant gaps.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 7 parameters. The tool description adds little beyond the schema: 'Bulk-import' is generic, and the features listed (dry-run, dedupe, snapshot flags) are already reflected in the schema's parameter descriptions. No additional context is provided.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: bulk-importing memories from inline entries or snapshot files. It distinguishes from sibling tools like store_memory (single) by specifying 'bulk-import' and listing supported features.

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 states what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like store_memory or search_memories. There is no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or exclusion criteria.

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