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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false and destructive=false, and the description adds meaningful context beyond them: the note is customer-invisible, no notification is sent, so it runs without confirmation, and it requires a Cotlet API key with app access. It omits reversibility/rate-limit details but covers the key behavioral traits.

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?

Front-loaded and readable, but several sentences restate the same privacy point ('customer does not see it', 'for your reference only', 'nothing is sent to anyone'), which dilutes rather than 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?

For a simple two-parameter note-write tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the definition gives an agent enough to call it correctly; only the note text format is left entirely to the schema.

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 100%, with customer_id sourced from find_customer already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra syntax, format, or length guidance for the note text, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a private note to a customer profile') and explicitly contrasts it with what it is not (an appointment comment the customer can see). An agent can distinguish this from related note/comment tools without opening the schema.

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?

Clearly explains the selection context: private internal note vs. customer-visible appointment comment, and notes the latter is not written by this tool. No other siblings are named, so it stops short of full alternative routing, but the when/when-not is unambiguous.

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