Apple Suggest Note Folders

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, lowering the bar. The description adds only the notion of 'current Apple data surfaces' and the fallback context; no additional behavioral details such as return format, ordering, or error conditions are disclosed. 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?

Two short sentences, but the first is a fragment that mostly restates the title. The second sentence is informative about the fallback purpose. Slightly under-specified but not bloated.

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?

For a simple suggest tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers the primary use case but omits parameter semantics and any reference to sibling tools like notes_list_folders. Given the low schema coverage, the description is incomplete.

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?

Both parameters (limit, query) have no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the tool description makes no mention of how they behave. The description completely fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 says the tool suggests note folders, but the phrasing is a noun phrase rather than an actionable statement. It does not explain what the tool returns or what 'current Apple data surfaces' means. The resource is clear from the name, but the description adds little beyond the title.

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?

Explicitly identifies its use as a completion fallback for clients without MCP completion support. This provides a clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not name alternatives like notes_list_folders or provide exclusions.

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