import_memories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return value (number imported) but does not mention whether existing memories are affected, deduplication behavior, authentication requirements, or side effects of importing.

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 a single concise sentence that places the action first and includes the key input and return value. There is no wasted wording.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should compensate with richer context. It only states the basic function and return count, but omits critical details like format expectations, merge/replace behavior, and any constraints, making it incomplete for a potentially mutating operation.

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 one parameter 'payload' with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description only says 'from an export payload', which gives no structural detail. This is inadequate for understanding what to pass, especially since payload is a nested object.

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 states the tool imports memories and specifies the source (export payload) and return value (count). It distinguishes from export_memories as the counterpart, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other memory-related tools like restore.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'export payload' implies it's for restoring previously exported data, but there are no direct references to sibling tools or exclusion scenarios.

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