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

Annotations provide no hints (all false), so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions bulk support ('Bulk support: accepts entity_ids for batched execution') but does not state that the tool is read-only or that it modifies data. Including 'create' in the description muddies whether this is a mutation operation, and the 'Flattened action: list' note is ambiguous. No side effects, return format, or authentication needs are mentioned.

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 short and front-loaded with the tool's purpose, but the inclusion of multiple actions and the '[Flattened action: list]' note create a disjointed structure. The information is not presented in a logical flow, making it harder to parse quickly.

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?

With 9 parameters, no output schema, and no helpful annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to perform a basic list call, what required parameters mean, how filtering works, or what the response looks like. The tool's complexity demands far more detail than provided.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions `data` (for create) and `entity_ids` (for bulk), neither of which is central to the list action. Parameters like page, limit, order, filter, account, entity_type are not explained at all. The description adds almost no value for understanding the 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 states that the tool lists notes for an entity type ('Notas de uma entidade... list (todas as notas do tipo de entidade)') and distinguishes this from listing by a single entity ('list_by_entity (notas de 1 registro)'). However, it also mentions 'create' as an action, which is redundant since separate tools exist and could confuse the agent about the tool's actual scope. The note '[Flattened action: list]' partially clarifies, but the presence of other actions weakens purpose clarity.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists actions (list, list_by_entity, create) but does not clearly instruct that this tool is specifically for listing all notes of an entity type, or when to choose kommo_notes_list_by_entity instead. Since sibling tools exist, the lack of any 'use when' statement is a significant gap.

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