remember

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

The description adds the behavioral trait 'pending review', implying the fact is not immediately active. However, with no annotations, the description carries full burden and could disclose more, such as persistence, overwrite behavior, or review process.

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 single-sentence description is concise but overly brief. It lacks structure and could be expanded to include key behavioral notes without becoming verbose. The sentence is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 tool has 3 parameters (1 required) and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention parameter roles or defaults, and does not leverage the existing output schema to hint at return values. The description leaves significant gaps for agent understanding.

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?

Parameter descriptions are absent from both the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description. The description does not explain the 'kind' or 'confidence' parameters, leaving the agent without meaning beyond parameter names and defaults.

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 ('Stage') and resource ('durable fact about the user into memory'), and the 'pending review' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'recall' which likely retrieves facts. This makes the purpose specific and distinct.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'recall' or any alternatives. The description only explains what it does, not the context or conditions for its use.

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