create_note

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

With no annotations, the description fully informs the agent about key behaviors: it refuses to overwrite, adds YAML frontmatter, and has a smart-write pipeline for suggestions and automatic folder placement. This provides thorough transparency without contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds essential information without redundancy. It is concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite no output schema or annotations, the description covers the tool's main function, refusal behavior, frontmatter addition, and smart-write pipeline details for all parameters. It provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the smart-write pipeline (e.g., auto_wikilink defaults to suggestion-only, folder omission triggers semantic placement). This extra context justifies a 4.

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 clearly states 'Create a new markdown note in the vault' which is a specific verb and resource. It implies differentiation from siblings like append_to_note or edit_section by focusing on creation, but does not explicitly distinguish itself, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 for creating new notes and mentions refusal to overwrite, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like append_to_note. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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