List or search notes

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-open-world safety profile, so the description's value is in disclosing the default sort ('newest first') and the pagination contract ('next_offset while more remain'). That tells the agent how to loop and when results are exhausted, context nothing in the schema or annotations provides.

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 sentences, no filler, with the most important facts — result set scope, ordering, and return contract — front-loaded. Every clause carries information an agent needs before calling.

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 an 8-parameter, zero-required search tool with no output schema, the definition supplies the essentials: what comes back (ids), pagination behavior, and default ordering. It could say more about the default/maximum limit and what an empty result means, but nothing critical is missing.

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 75%, and most filter parameters carry their own descriptions (query, folder, modified_after/before, has_attachments, has_handwriting). The description mirrors those filter categories ('words, folder, modified dates, attachments or handwriting') but adds no format or boundary semantics, and limit/offset are only obliquely referenced via 'next_offset'.

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+resource ('Find notes') plus the filter dimensions and the fixed ordering ('newest first'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by declaring that it returns note ids consumed by the other tools, so an agent knows this is the discovery entry point rather than a content reader.

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?

'Returns note ids for the other tools' establishes the intended search-then-read workflow, which is the key usage signal here. It doesn't name explicit alternatives or exclusions (e.g., use notes_overview to discover folder names, or read_note once you have an id), so it falls short of a 5.

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