get_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' signals a read-only operation and 'all notes' discloses the broad, unfiltered-by-default scope. It does not mention pagination, ordering, or category matching behavior, but for a simple read tool these are less critical gaps.

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 with the action and resource front-loaded. The parenthetical for the optional category filter is compact and adds relevant information without any filler.

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?

Given the tool is simple with one optional parameter and has an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter role adequately. It is incomplete regarding alternatives like search_notes and the exact value format for category, but it is minimally viable for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema provides zero description coverage for the single 'category' parameter. The description adds the key semantic that category is optional and acts as a filter, which meaningfully supplements the schema. It still does not specify whether category expects a name, slug, or ID, leaving some ambiguity.

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 identifies the action (retrieve) and resource (notes), and specifies the optional category filter. It is easily recognizable as a read/list operation and is distinct from create/delete siblings, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from search_notes.

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 phrase 'Retrieve all notes' implies the tool is for broad retrieval rather than targeted searching, and the optional category filter adds context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over search_notes or how category selection relates to list_categories.

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