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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds that batch execution is supported via note_ids, which is useful behavioral context. It does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or behavior when sharing an already-shared note.

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 two crisp sentences: first states the core action, second adds the bulk capability. Every word contributes 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?

The description covers the primary purpose and bulk behavior, but it does not fully explain all five parameters or the interaction between note_id and note_ids. Since there is no output schema, return behavior remains unspecified.

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 0%, and the description only clarifies email and note_ids (bulk). It leaves note_id, unsafe, and account without added meaning, making some parameters ambiguous.

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 what the tool does: 'Compartilha uma nota com um colaborador (por email)' (shares a note with a collaborator by email). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like keep_remove_note_collaborator and keep_list_note_collaborators.

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 through the 'Bulk support: accepts note_ids for batched execution' note, which indicates when to use note_ids. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or name alternatives such as keep_remove_note_collaborator.

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