memory_store

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool performs auto-embedding, summary extraction, entity extraction, and applies a TTL. However, it omits details like required permissions, rate limits, side effects on existing data, or whether the process is synchronous.

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?

A single 11-word sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's core purpose and automatic features. No redundant information; every phrase earns its place.

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 having an output schema, the description does not explain the return value. With 9 parameters, many optional, and no annotation or schema descriptions, the single sentence leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and how to use it effectively among 30+ siblings.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter-level details. It mentions 'content' but does not clarify the meaning or constraints of 'tags', 'metadata', 'priority', or 'related_ids'. The schema lists defaults but the description does not leverage them.

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 action ('Store') and resource ('new memory'), and lists key features (auto-embedding, summary, entity extraction, TTL) that distinguish it from update, delete, or query tools. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like memory_update or memory_use.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it. The default source 'assistant' is not explained.

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