Create Note

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

Annotations already establish the operation as non-read-only and destructive, so the description does not need to restate that. It adds value by noting that the description supports basic HTML/rich text and that the tool returns a compact note summary. These are behavioral details beyond the annotations, though the return summary may be redundant given the output schema exists.

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 three sentences long, with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and resource, then provides essential prerequisites and return behavior. Every sentence contributes unique information, making this an excellent example of conciseness.

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 create tool with 14 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core essentials: required fields, ID resolution, content format, and return summary. It doesn't explain the optional association parameters, but the schema handles those. Given the complexity, a small gap exists around behavior for edge cases (e.g., invalid related_to), so 4 is appropriate.

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 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful guidance by telling the agent to resolve IDs via list_note_types and list_users, which is not in the schema for those parameters. This extra context helps the agent select valid values, elevating the score to 4.

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 'Creates one Recruit CRM note' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_note and search_notes by focusing on creation. The mention of required fields further anchors the purpose.

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 explicitly directs users to resolve note type IDs with list_note_types and user IDs with list_users, providing clear guidance for prerequisite lookups. It does not explicitly say when NOT to use this tool, but the context is clear. This earns a 4 rather than 5 because no exclusions or alternative tool mentions are given.

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