List Webhound Sidecar Notes

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

Annotations already indicate `readOnlyHint=true` and `destructiveHint=false`, so the description's addition of 'No spend' provides a cost behavioral trait beyond what annotations cover. This adds value without contradicting the annotations.

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 only two sentences (16 words), front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no unnecessary information. 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?

Although an output schema exists (so return values are covered there) and annotations are present, the description lacks parameter documentation for the 3 parameters. For a tool with filters (`status` enum, `limit`), this omission makes the description incomplete for effective 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?

The input schema has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage, meaning the description provides no explanation for `session_id`, `limit`, or `status`. Given low coverage, the description must compensate but fails to do so, leaving the agent without guidance on parameter usage.

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 'Read shared sidecar notes for a session' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like `webhound_add_sidecar_notes` and `webhound_update_sidecar_note` by using 'read' and implying it's a listing operation.

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 an explicit usage scenario: 'Use this to see what the calling agent has already shared with Webhound before adding, correcting, or dismissing notes.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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