zhiji_memory_ingest

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

No annotations provided, but description fully carries the burden: discloses asynchronous behavior (vector embedding, profile extraction, fact extraction, importance scoring) and the limitation to text-only input.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with main action, then covers async processing, then constraints and alternatives. Every sentence is informative with no waste.

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 tool with 4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, how it works, constraints, alternatives (zhiji_ingest_file). The agent can correctly select and invoke this 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 100% with descriptions; description adds extra context: messages pairing requirement, default userEmail from MB_USER_EMAIL, and that conversationId appends to the same conversation.

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?

Clearly states it writes a conversation round into long-term memory, distinguishes from zhiji_ingest_file for non-text files, and explains the asynchronous processing that follows.

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?

Explicitly says when to use zhiji_ingest_file instead (for non-text inputs). Also provides constraints: messages must be paired user-assistant with at least one user message, and conversationId can be reused to append.

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