agentbay_memory_store

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the internal pipeline (poison detection, dedup, embedding, persist) and that tier controls lifetime. This provides good insight into behavior beyond a simple 'store'.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core purpose and pipeline, then tier guidance. Efficient and clear.

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?

Despite 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It omits return value, tier effects, parameter dependencies, and how the pipeline handles failures. Needs more detail for a complex tool.

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 coverage is 67%, but the description only adds context for the tier parameter ('Set tier to control lifetime'). Required parameters like type lack schema descriptions, and the description does not compensate for missing parameter details.

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's action (store a memory) and lists the pipeline steps (poison detection, dedup, embedding, persist), plus notes tier controls lifetime. It differentiates from sibling tools like agentbay_memory_recall and agentbay_memory_forget.

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 mentions tier control but does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like agentbay_knowledge_record or agentbay_agent_memory_record. Some context is implied but not stated.

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