notes_get_metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that note bodies are not returned, which is a useful behavioral detail. However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as authentication needs or rate limits. The added value is modest.

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 consists of two short, direct sentences with no unnecessary words or redundancies. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core action.

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's low complexity (single parameter, output schema exists) and comprehensive annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and a key behavioral constraint. However, the lack of parameter semantics for 'handle' leaves ambiguity, preventing full contextual completeness.

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 schema provides no description for the 'handle' parameter (0% coverage), and the description does not clarify its format (e.g., UUID vs. title). The phrase 'by handle' offers minimal guidance. Given low schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'Apple Notes metadata', and the method 'by handle'. It also explicitly notes that note bodies are not returned, distinguishing it from notes_get_content and notes_search.

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 retrieving metadata by handle, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like notes_get_content or notes_search, nor does it mention prerequisites or limitations.

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