lore_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool creates or updates (mutation), but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, required authorization, or what happens on update (e.g., overwrite vs. merge). Minimal transparency beyond basic action.

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 a single sentence, concise and to the point. However, it could be slightly more direct (e.g., 'Create or update a memory node.') and still be clear. Front-loading is decent.

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 5 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and a set of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a 'memory' is, how it relates to other lore nodes, or behavioral details like idempotency or error conditions. The agent lacks context to use the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions 'path' explicitly. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the description adds no extra value.

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 (create/update) and resource (memory node), and specifies the method (by path) and kind (memory). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like lore_capture, which might also create durable facts, so purpose is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like lore_capture, lore_log, or lore_todo. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The agent is left without direction on selecting this tool over siblings.

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