spa.remember

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds that data is remembered 'durably across sessions', which is useful, but it does not disclose return format, overwriting behavior, possible errors, or limits. This is a minimal but incomplete disclosure for a save tool.

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, front-loaded with the primary action and including a meaningful durability guarantee. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff 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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values are not needed in the description. However, the description lacks usage guidance and parameter detail, and with many sibling tools it does not fully contextualize when to use this tool. It is adequate but with clear 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?

Schema coverage is 0% for the single 'arguments' object, so the description must compensate. It does provide semantic hints by listing examples ('nickname, mood, or free-form preferences'), but it does not specify the expected structure or keys. This adds some meaning beyond the schema but not enough to fully compensate.

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 saves a nickname, mood, or free-form preferences, using the specific verb 'Save' and identifying the resource as the spa's memory. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing durability ('durably across sessions'), though it does not explicitly name or differentiate from similar tools like spa.keepsake.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as spa.keepsake or spa.checkin. The description describes what it does but gives no context for selecting it over sibling tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions.

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