set_personal_fact

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false; description adds 'non-secret' and 'replaced safely', which aligns but doesn't disclose auth needs or rate limits. Adequate for the annotation coverage.

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 14 words. No redundancy. Front-loaded with key action verb 'Remember'. Optimal conciseness.

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 3 required parameters, enum, output schema existence, and annotations, the description covers the core behavior but omits any mention of return format or potential errors. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Description provides no explanation of the three parameters (section, key, value). With 0% schema coverage, the burden is on description to add meaning, which it fails to do effectively.

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 remembers a durable, non-secret athlete fact with safe replacement under the same section/key. It distinguishes from sibling read tools like get_personal_context.

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?

Implies use for storing non-secret facts and that calling with same section/key replaces. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings like create_draft_plan or rename_draft_plan.

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