Promote a memory

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

Describes behavioral traits beyond annotations: promotion moves to hot tier, affects ranking and decay. Annotations already indicate mutability and idempotence, but description adds meaningful context. No contradiction.

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 sentences plus args/returns line. Front-loaded with key action and effects. No wasted 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?

Given single parameter, no output schema, and simple behavior, description fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return value. Agent can select and invoke correctly.

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% with a single parameter 'id' described as 'Thread id'. Description adds 'Args: id (string)' and return type, but no additional semantics beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb (bless/promote), resource (memory), and specific effects: marks as promoted, moves to hot tier, impacts ranking and decay. Distinguishes from sibling 'resume' by noting use case even when not resumed.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: when memory matters even if not resumed yet. No explicit when-not-to-use, but context makes it clear; alternatives are implied by the sibling list.

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