notes_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides almost none. 'Search notes with specific filters' doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, whether it has pagination (though the schema suggests it does via 'limit' and 'after'), what authentication is required, rate limits, or what the return format looks like. For a search tool with complex filtering capabilities, this is critically insufficient.

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 extremely concise at just 5 words. While this leads to severe under-specification, it's not wordy or repetitive. Every word technically serves a purpose, though far more content is needed for this complex tool.

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 complexity (5 parameters with nested filter/sort structures, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. A search tool with this level of parameter complexity needs substantial explanation of filtering capabilities, return format, pagination behavior, and usage context, none of which is 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?

The schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description provides no parameter information whatsoever. 'Search notes with specific filters' vaguely references filters but doesn't explain the complex filterGroups structure, what properties can be filtered on, what the 'properties' parameter does, or how sorting works. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Search notes with specific filters' restates the tool name 'notes_search' without adding meaningful specificity. It mentions 'specific filters' but doesn't explain what kind of notes or what search capabilities exist. Compared to sibling tools like 'notes_list' and 'notes_get', it doesn't clearly differentiate this as a filtered search operation versus other note retrieval methods.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'notes_list' (likely for unfiltered listing) and 'notes_get' (likely for retrieving specific notes by ID), there's no indication of when this filtered search is appropriate versus those other options. No prerequisites, limitations, or use case context is mentioned.

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