search_notes

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It reveals the search uses ILIKE pattern matching but omits whether the operation is read-only, safe, or if there are any side effects. No information on permissions, rate limits, or response format.

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 single sentence is concise and to the point. However, it could be slightly more structured by explaining parameters or usage. Still, it earns its place without verbosity.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete for a search tool. It lacks details on return values, pagination, error handling, and how the search interacts with the user's note store. Sibling tools suggest a broader ecosystem, but this definition does not leverage that context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add value. It explains that query uses ILIKE, but does not describe the limit parameter (e.g., maximum results or default). The meaning of query is partially clarified, but limit remains unclear.

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 the tool searches note titles and content using ILIKE, specifying the verb 'search' and resource 'note titles and content'. It distinguishes from siblings like list_notes and other search tools, though 'ILIKE' may require technical understanding.

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 list_notes or search_emails. There are no usage examples, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

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