sassy_memory_log

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the action ('Log a milestone event') which implies a write/append operation, but gives no details on persistence, permissions, or side effects. The examples are helpful but behavioral nuance is not explored.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a clear parameter list. Every line adds value, with 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?

The tool has low complexity, an output schema exists, and the description covers the intended usage and parameters. It does not mention retrieval or related tools, but given the sibling context and schema presence, this is not a significant gap.

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?

Although schema description coverage is formally 0%, the description includes inline parameter explanations (event, project, tags) with concrete examples for event and tags. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema property titles and helps the agent understand expected values.

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 logs milestone events and gives examples of significant completions, decisions, or changes. It is specific about the resource and action, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sassy_memory_milestones or sassy_memory_remember.

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 says 'Use for significant completions, decisions, or changes,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or scenarios where it should not be used, which would make it more complete.

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