Recall notes

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and not open-world, and the description reinforces this. It adds behavioral context beyond annotations: notes are persistent, ordered newest-first, scoped to the workspace, and intended for recovering prior session context. This is useful but not exhaustive; it does not describe edge-case behavior such as empty results.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The main action and scope are front-loaded, followed by usage timing, filtering capability, and a clear pointer to the sibling alternative.

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 retrieval tool with four optional parameters, the description plus schema covers what the tool does, when to call it, how to filter, and which sibling to use instead. The absence of an output schema is not a serious gap here since the tool's purpose as a note reader is clear.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that query and tag filtering can be combined ('and/or tag') and clarifying that query is free-text, which is a useful semantic nuance beyond the individual schema descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read the persistent notes saved with remember for this workspace, newest first.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like work_log and remember by naming them and defining the read/retrieval role.

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 tells when to use it: 'Call it at the start of a session together with work_log to recover context from previous chats.' It also identifies the alternative, work_log, for the automatic activity journal, giving the agent both positive and negative usage guidance.

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