Granola MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It minimally states that it returns 'Search results with matching documents' but lacks disclosure of search semantics (fuzzy vs exact matching), rate limits, permission requirements, or pagination behavior expected for a search tool.

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 uses a clear Args/Returns structure that efficiently organizes information. It is appropriately sized given the need to document five parameters, with no significant waste, though it mentions a 'ctx' parameter not present in the provided schema.

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?

The description adequately covers the input parameters and acknowledges the output (though an output schema exists, reducing the burden). However, it lacks behavioral details and sibling differentiation required for a complete understanding of the tool's role in the server.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description successfully compensates by documenting all 5 parameters in the Args section, including format hints (YYYY-MM-DD) and default values. It adds necessary semantic meaning that the schema lacks.

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 opening sentence 'Search meeting notes by keyword or phrase' provides a clear verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'search_by_person' by emphasizing keyword/phrase search, though it could explicitly differentiate from 'list_meetings' or 'get_meeting'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'search_by_person' or 'list_meetings'. It does not mention prerequisites, optimal use cases, or when to avoid using it.

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