get_notes

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds browsing/listing semantics and selection criteria but does not disclose return shape, ordering details, or behavior when multiple filters are combined. This is acceptable given the annotation coverage but adds only moderate behavioral context.

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 tight sentences: the first states the tool's purpose and scope, the second gives routing guidance to search_notes. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 read-only listing tool with no required parameters, the description covers all relevant selection modes and the distinction from the search sibling. The schema handles parameter details, and the annotations handle the safety profile, so nothing essential is missing 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 description coverage is 80%, and the schema already documents id, tags, limit, and project. The description restates these criteria at a high level but adds no meaningful extra meaning about how parameters combine, offset usage, or default limit/ordering behavior beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Retrieve notes from the vault') and enumerates the selection modes: id, tag, project, or most recently updated. It also explicitly differentiates this from search_notes, so an agent can immediately tell which tool to use.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Use this for browsing/listing, not free-text search' and names the alternative tool directly ('use search_notes for that'). This is an explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use statement.

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