Add Memory

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation. The description adds that it stores in 'Cognis memory' and requires at least one owner/agent/session identifier, but doesn't disclose side effects like whether messages are appended or existing memory affected. It doesn't contradict annotations, but adds minimal behavioral context.

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?

Two short sentences, first states the core action, second the critical constraint. No filler or 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?

For a simple create operation with a well-specified schema and annotations, the description covers the purpose, the key requirement, and the basic usage context. It doesn't explain return values or behavior when multiple identifiers are supplied, but these are not essential for a basic call. Given the high schema coverage and annotations, this is complete enough.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a critical cross-parameter constraint ('At least one of owner_id/agent_id/session_id is required') that is not encoded as a schema requirement. This meaningfully helps the agent construct valid calls.

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 states a specific action ('Store') on a specific resource ('Cognis memory') with a clear scope ('conversation messages'). It distinguishes from sibling memory operations (search, list, get, update, delete) by using 'add' in the name and 'store' in the description. The identifier requirement adds precision.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for persisting conversation messages, which is the appropriate use case. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like memory_update or memory_delete, but the context is unambiguous. The requirement of at least one identifier provides practical usage guidance.

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