Update a note

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses partial update behavior, required identifier uniqueness, and type restrictions (rejects body/title on rich-format/append-only notes). Does not mention permissions, idempotency, or return value, but adds meaningful context beyond schema.

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?

Three sentences, each essential. First states action and identity. Second clarifies partial update semantics. Third adds restrictions and identifier rule. No wasted words.

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?

Tool has 5 parameters and no output schema. Description covers update behavior, restrictions, and identifier rules. Does not describe return value or error conditions, but overall provides enough context for correct invocation.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value: clarifies 'omit to leave unchanged' for body and title, explains folder_id behavior (omit or null to remove), and emphasizes mutual exclusivity of filename/id. This goes beyond the 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?

Description uses specific verbs and objects: 'update a plain-text note's title, body, and/or folder'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'append_to_note' (which appends) and 'create_note' (which creates), and the identification method (filename or id) is precise.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Only the fields you supply change; omitted fields are left untouched.' Warns about restrictions on rich-format and append-only notes. Instructs to provide exactly one of filename or id. Does not explicitly contrast with similar tools but covers key use cases.

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