decision_memory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions basic actions (record, query, manage) but does not disclose traits like whether decisions can be deleted, updated, or how persistence works. Lacks detail on 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?

Single sentence with three clear verbs front-loaded. No unnecessary words. Every part adds value.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and scope. Could be enhanced by specifying what 'manage' includes (e.g., update, delete).

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?

No parameters in schema, and schema description coverage is 100% (trivially). Per guidelines, 0 params baseline is 4. Description does not add param info but none needed.

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 specifies verb+resource: 'Record, query, and manage architectural decisions' and scope 'across sessions'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'agent_memory' which deals with general memory, and 'check_decision_alignment' which is a specific check.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like 'agent_memory' or 'check_decision_alignment'. The description only states what it does without context of alternatives or prerequisites.

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