search_notes

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Undocumented endpoint' and provides no behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, destructive, or rate-limited. This is a significant gap for a search tool.

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 short but includes unnecessary text: 'FREE' and 'Undocumented endpoint' add no value. The first sentence is clear, but the fluff reduces conciseness.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, pagination behavior, or how filtering across attached entities works.

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 description coverage is 50% (q_keywords and contact_id have descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it repeats 'Search notes' without clarifying parameter usage, defaults, or pagination for page/per_page.

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 clearly states 'Search notes in your Apollo workspace', identifying the verb and resource. It also mentions notes can be attached to contacts, accounts, or opportunities. However, it does not differentiate from sibling search tools like search_contacts or search_accounts.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The only hint is that notes are attached to other entities, but no explicit usage scenario.

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