add_gotcha

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It conveys the append action and file path but omits important details like side effects (e.g., file creation if missing), error behavior, or permissions needed. This is minimal transparency.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence immediately states the action and file location; the second provides usage context. Highly efficient and well-structured.

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 simple append tool with one parameter, the description covers the essential aspects: action, target, content format, and usage scenario. An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. A minor improvement would be noting if the file is created automatically.

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 sole parameter `note` lacks description in the schema (0% coverage). The description adds value by specifying it is a 'one-line' note and the expected content ('watch out for X'), compensating for the schema gap.

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 specifies the action (append a one-line note), the target resource (`.ai-memory/gotchas.md`), and the type of content ('watch out for X'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like `add_decision` and `add_fact`.

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 explicitly states when to use: 'for surprises that wasted your time and might trip the next agent.' It provides clear context for usage but does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, which is acceptable given the sibling list.

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