session_add_note

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool adds a note but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether it appends or overwrites), required session state, or authorization needs. The return type is vague ('Record result').

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 concise, with the purpose front-loaded in the first line, followed by a standard Args/Returns format. Every sentence adds value, though the Returns section is minimal.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no schema descriptions), the description is moderately complete. It explains the note type options and purpose but omits context like session prerequisites or whether the note is appended to a step or the session.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists possible values for 'note_type' and describes 'note' and 'related_variables' briefly, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it lacks details on the format or constraints of 'related_variables'.

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 the tool adds a human knowledge note to the derivation, specifying it as a non-computational step. This distinct purpose differentiates it from sibling tools, which focus on computational steps, session management, or other actions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'session_record_step' or other session tools. The description does not mention prerequisites like an active session or contrast with other note-related tools.

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