promote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses that promotion 'keeps the same id and updates the stored title, tags, and structured content in place.' This reveals the non-destructive update behavior, though auth requirements are not mentioned.

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 very concise: two paragraphs, four sentences, with the main action front-loaded. Every sentence adds value without any fluff.

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 simple tool (2 required params, output schema present), the description covers the action, usage context, and effect. It is sufficient and well-rounded for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 detailed descriptions for both parameters. The description adds minimal extra value, merely restating the target kinds. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides sufficient semantics.

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 'Manually promote one stored memory to a stronger durable record type,' specifying the verb (promote) and resource (stored memory). While it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the purpose is distinct and well-communicated.

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 explains when to use the 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.' It provides explicit context, though it does not list alternatives or when not to use.

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