pattern_store

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

With no annotations, the description explains the behavioral intent of each action. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting on save, error on load of missing name) or details about the list output format. The session_id parameter is mentioned but its behavior when omitted is not fully explained.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and is relatively concise. It uses a semicolon-separated list for actions, which is efficient. However, it could be slightly shorter by omitting the example, though the example aids clarity.

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 the complexity (5 parameters, 3 actions, no output schema), the description covers the primary operations and sibling differentiation. However, it omits important details such as error conditions (e.g., what happens if name is missing for load), behavior of session_id when not provided, and any constraints (e.g., maximum pattern size or naming rules). The lack of output schema makes return value information absent.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the roles of action in a compact summary and by providing a usage example. It also explains the session_id parameter's cross-session sharing aspect, which goes beyond the schema description.

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 'Persist patterns to disk and read them back' and enumerates three distinct actions (save, load, list). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'session' by stating the scope is on-disk patterns, not runtime sessions.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'For session lifecycle (create/destroy/list active sessions) use the session tool — pattern_store deals with on-disk patterns, not runtime sessions.' Also includes an example call pattern.

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