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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/non-destructive. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: pagination support and the found:false outcome for an absent store or missing note, which an agent cannot get from the annotations.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately following with the pagination and not-found behavior. No wasted words.

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?

Output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, so the description only needs to add workflow and edge-case context, which it does via pagination and found:false. Adequate for correct invocation, with minor room to note the notes.list prerequisite explicitly.

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%, so the schema documents all 7 parameters (file, limit, start, cursor, operation_id, etc.). The description only alludes to pagination and "by file" and adds no format or semantics beyond the schema, so 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 ("Reads") and resource ("one listed note's Markdown"), and the phrase "one listed note's" implicitly routes to notes.list versus the bulk notes.list sibling. It is clear, though it never names the sibling it is distinguished from.

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?

"when its contents are needed" gives a usable trigger condition, and "one listed note's" implies the file must first come from notes.list. There is no explicit exclusion, but the context for invoking it is clear.

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