transfer_memory_pack

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

Annotations provide only readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds significant behavioral context: it creates a derived pack with transfer provenance, and requires a mandatory gate approval. This goes beyond what annotations convey and helps the agent understand the tool's side effects and constraints.

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 two sentences: one explaining the action and one emphasizing the gate requirement. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with key 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?

The description explains what the tool does and a critical constraint (gate requirement). It does not mention return values (e.g., ID of the derived pack), but since there is no output schema, a brief mention would improve completeness. Still, it covers the main action and constraint well.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds emphasis that 'approved_by' is mandatory but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3 given high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Transfer a memory pack between agents via a governed knowledge corridor. Creates a derived pack with transfer provenance.' The verb 'transfer' and resource 'memory pack' are specific. The mention of 'governed knowledge corridor' and 'transfer provenance' distinguishes it from sibling tools like compose, distill, load, promote, seal, which have different purposes.

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 explicitly states 'ALWAYS requires MANDATORY gate — no silent transfers.' This gives clear context on when this tool should be used (for governed transfers) and implies that other tools without gate requirements are not suited for this. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it.

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