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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: a copy is posted to a linked LovedOne family inbox, and notes may be health-related so only family-approved content should be recorded.

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 four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and side effect. Each sentence contributes useful information without unnecessary detail.

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 write tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key side effect and privacy consideration. It leaves minor gaps around permissions, error behavior, and the undocumented agencyId parameter.

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 description coverage is 75%, and the description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the agencyId parameter, which is the one parameter lacking a schema description.

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 a specific verb and resource: "Logs a note on an agency client." It also clarifies the cross-posting behavior to a LovedOne family inbox, distinguishing this write tool from the read/list and scheduling siblings.

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 implies usage by saying it logs a note on an agency client and includes a privacy constraint for health-related notes. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name any sibling tool as an alternative.

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