apple_notes_by_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the operation is reading all notes in a folder, but omits details like whether it returns full note content, sorting order, pagination behavior, or error handling for invalid folder names. Adequate but not thorough.

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 a single concise sentence (10 words) with no redundancy. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness, e.g., mentioning it returns a list of notes.

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 tool has 2 params, no output schema, and no annotations. The description explains the primary function but does not specify return format, constraints (e.g., 'only notes from default account'), or behavior when the folder is empty. Adequate for an agent but minimal.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described ('Folder name', 'Max results (default 50)'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify folder name case-sensitivity or limit boundary. Baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get all notes'), resource ('notes'), and scope ('in a specific folder by folder name'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like apple_notes_list (no folder filter) and apple_notes_search (search by content).

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 when a folder name is known but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apple_notes_search or apple_notes_get. No 'when not to use' or mention of sibling tools.

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