memkernel_note

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that notes are subject to garbage collection over time, which is a key behavioral trait beyond the schema. However, it omits return behavior, note size limits, whether notes are queryable, and interaction with memkernel_trigger_gc.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Every word (Record, ephemeral, scratchpad, GC) adds meaning.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a one-parameter tool, the description covers the essential lifecycle trait (ephemeral, GC'd) that the schema cannot express. Minor gaps around size limits or queryability are acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the note is an ephemeral scratchpad, distinguishing the content from durable logs or decisions. The single required string parameter's semantics are adequately implied by the verb 'Record' plus the scratchpad context.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: write an ephemeral scratchpad note. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like memkernel_append_decision or memkernel_log_execution by its ephemeral/scratchpad nature. Lacks explicit sibling differentiation but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus memkernel_append_decision (durable decisions) or memkernel_log_execution. The 'ephemeral' hint implies transient use cases but doesn't state exclusions or alternatives.

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