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

Annotations provide only destructiveHint=true; the "WRITE:" prefix is consistent with a mutation and confirms the write nature. The customer-visibility effect of `public` is useful behavioral context, but it largely restates the schema, and there is no disclosure of permissions, return payload, or default visibility explicitly.

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 short sentences with zero filler, front-loaded with the WRITE classification followed by the one parameter that changes behavior. Nothing needs trimming and nothing important is buried.

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 three-parameter mutation this covers the essentials (operation, key parameter behavior, endpoint), but with no output schema the description could say what is returned (e.g., the created note id) and whether the note is private by default. The sparse annotations leave those gaps unfilled.

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 job_number, note, and public are all already documented in the schema, including the min/max length on note. The description's mention of `public` adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, 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 note to a job") and prefixes it with "WRITE", so the operation's nature is unambiguous. It also pins the exact API surface (POST /{account}/jobs/{job_number}/notes.xml), making it clearly distinct from kickserv_add_customer_note by resource.

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 gives one concrete usage rule — set `public` to true for customer visibility — which implies the default is a private/internal note. However, it offers no guidance on when to choose this over kickserv_add_customer_note or kickserv_list_job_notes, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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