promote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states that promotion 'keeps the same id and updates the stored title, tags, and structured content in place', which is useful. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, or error cases (e.g., if id does not exist). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two paragraphs, four sentences total, with the core action in the first sentence. It is front-loaded, concise, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 two required parameters, schema descriptions, and an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and primary use case. Missing details like prerequisites (memory must exist) are minor. The description is fairly complete for the tool's complexity.

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 each parameter having a description. The description reinforces the purpose but adds little new semantic detail beyond the schema. For example, 'id' is described as 'Exact memory identifier' in schema, and 'to_kind' has enum values explained. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 promotes a stored memory to a stronger durable record type. It specifies the action ('promote'), the resource ('stored memory'), and the outcome ('stronger durable record type'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning manual promotion versus automatic reflex layer promotion.

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 says 'Use this tool when you know a record should be treated as a learn, gotcha, or domain note even if the reflex layer has not promoted it yet.' This provides a clear condition for use. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like 'store' or 'recall', but the guidance is sufficient.

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