Leer nota

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Solo lectura' (read-only), which is a key behavioral trait ensuring safety. It also implies the return is the note content, though it doesn't detail error handling or formatting. This is adequate for a simple read 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 is two short sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the main action, gives a concrete example, and ends with a clear read-only note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description is complete. It specifies the input semantics, gives an example, and clarifies the read-only behavior. No additional context is needed for successful use.

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%: the single 'path' parameter already has a description in the schema. The tool description repeats the relative-path semantics and adds an example, but this adds little beyond the structured field. Baseline 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Lee el contenido de una nota Markdown' (reads the content of a Markdown note). It also clarifies the path is relative to the vault root, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_notes and search_vault by focusing on direct content retrieval.

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 clear context: it specifies the path format with an example ('Proyectos/idea.md') and states it is relative to the vault root. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion scenarios, the read-only nature and path guidance make the intended usage obvious.

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