rednote_search_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses sorting options, language support, and the ability to limit results. However, it lacks details on pagination, authentication needs, or whether the tool is read-only.

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 concise: a brief introductory paragraph followed by clean parameter documentation. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words. The parameter section is structured and easy to scan.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain the return format (e.g., list of note IDs or summaries). For a search tool, this is a notable gap. However, the parameter documentation is complete, and the purpose 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?

The schema has 0% coverage (no descriptions in the schema), but the description compensates fully with detailed explanations for each parameter: query with examples, sort with enumerated values, and limit with range and default. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 RedNote notes by keyword or topic, using a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('RedNote notes'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rednote_get_note_detail (which retrieves a single note) and rednote_generate_post (which creates content).

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 a clear purpose but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or comparative guidance is given, though it is implied that this is the go-to for searching notes.

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