share_memory

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing ownership requirement, quota limits, and return behavior. No contradiction with annotations; it complements them with practical constraints.

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 well-structured with clear sections (VISIBILITY LEVELS, WHEN TO USE, QUOTA, EXAMPLE, RETURNS). It is concise yet informative, with no unnecessary words.

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 tool with 2 required parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, the effects of each parameter, and what the agent can expect as return. Adequate for correct invocation.

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?

While the schema covers 100% of parameters, the description adds meaning by explaining the visibility enum values in the VISIBILITY LEVELS section and providing an example usage. This clarifies the purpose of each parameter beyond the schema.

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 verb 'set' and the resource 'visibility of a memory you own', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like recall_memories and get_public_memory. The inclusion of visibility levels and usage scenarios reinforces purpose clarity.

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 'WHEN TO USE' section lists specific conditions, providing clear context for when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for an AI agent to decide.

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