Update memory

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

The description mentions a key behavioral trait: preserving prior versions in history. However, with no annotations, it fails to disclose other important aspects such as idempotency, error handling (e.g., memory not found), or return value.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the core function. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks information about return values, side effects, prerequisites, or behavior for edge cases, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter details in the description, the agent receives no added meaning beyond the raw schema field names. The description does not explain the purpose or constraints of any of the 6 parameters.

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 uses the verb 'correct' with the resource 'memory', clearly indicating the action of updating an existing memory. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_memory' and 'supersede_memory' by implying a less destructive operation, but could be more explicit about what 'correct' entails.

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 its siblings. For example, there is no comparison with 'supersede_memory' or 'delete_memory' to help the agent choose appropriately.

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