Store to Hydra DB Memory (deprecated)

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

The description discloses that Hydra DB automatically extracts insights and builds a knowledge graph, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether calls are idempotent, how duplicates are handled, or any potential side effects like overwriting existing memories.

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 very concise: two informative sentences plus a deprecation notice. It is front-loaded with the most important guidance (deprecation) and each sentence adds value.

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 deprecated tool, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage, and key features (automatic extraction). It lacks details about return values or limits, but the deprecation reduces the need for completeness. It is sufficient for an agent to understand and avoid the 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning support for plain text and markdown, which is already reflected in the is_markdown parameter description. It does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 purpose: saving important information to Hydra DB memory, and explicitly lists use cases (facts, preferences, etc.). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool hydradb_ingest by marking itself as deprecated.

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 opens with 'DEPRECATED — use hydradb_ingest instead,' which is a strong when-not-to-use guideline. It also explains when to use: to persist facts, preferences, decisions, or notes for cross-session memory.

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