handoff_memory_append

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the durable append and the empty-text trigger to show MEMORY.md, but omits details like file creation, path resolution, or error handling. This is minimal but not absent.

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 that front-loads the main action and includes the conditional empty-text behavior 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?

For a simple append operation, the description covers the primary behavior and the important special case. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits any mention of the root parameter's role or what the tool returns, which could be ambiguous in a multi-tool handoff workflow. Still, it is reasonably complete for the core function.

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?

The input schema describes 'text' as a 'Markdown fragment to append', but 'root' has no description. The tool description adds no parameter semantics, leaving 50% of parameters (root) under-specified. It does not explain how root relates to MEMORY.md or the append operation.

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 a specific verb ('append') and a resource ('durable project memory'), and it adds a conditional behavior for empty text that differentiates it from sibling tools like handoff_save or handoff_recall.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need to append to existing project memory, and if text is empty, it serves to display MEMORY.md. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like handoff_save or handoff_init, so it stops short of full guidance.

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