Notes List

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description is consistent with this and adds the filter-by-folder/search behavioral detail. However, it doesn't disclose ordering, pagination, or default-file behavior beyond the schema. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The core action and the two optional filters are all present with zero waste, though it could plausibly add a mention of sorting behavior without becoming verbose.

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 an output schema covering the return shape, full parameter coverage in the schema, and a read-only annotation covering safety, the simple description is adequate for a list tool. The only minor omission is guidance on alternative sibling tools.

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% — limit, folder, and search are each described in the schema. The description's mention of filtering by folder or search term reinforces, but does not add meaning beyond, what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('List') with a concrete resource ('Apple Notes') and names the optional filtering behaviors. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like notes_read (reads one note) and notes_list_folders (lists folders, not 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 description implies usage context via the optional folder/search filters, but it never explicitly states when to choose this tool over notes_read or notes_list_folders, nor does it give exclusion criteria. An agent must infer the choice from the tool names alone.

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