record

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states episodes 'accumulate during a session' and serve as raw material for compression, implying additive behavior. It does not explicitly commit to being non-destructive or clarify side effects.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds necessary context without 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?

Given the tool's role in a session lifecycle (accumulating episodes for later compression into continuity), the description provides sufficient context. Return value is not described but is a common expectation for write operations.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the 'content' parameter by emphasizing reasoning over facts, but does not enhance understanding of 'source', 'metadata', or 'episode_type' beyond what the schema already describes.

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 uses the verb 'Record' and specifies the resource as 'a typed episode to memory'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools (delete_episode, recall, save_continuity) by being the only tool for episodic recording.

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 lists specific triggers for use: important decisions, patterns, tensions, questions, outcomes. It advises recording reasoning over facts. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools.

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