capacities_add_to_daily_note

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and does not disclose side effects like whether content is appended or overwrites existing content, the default timestamp behavior, or whether permissions are required. The noTimestamp parameter hints at timestamp prepending but the description does not confirm this behavior.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded and free of filler. It effectively communicates the core purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain return values, failure modes, or what happens if the daily note is missing. The implications of spaceId and noTimestamp are left entirely to the schema, leaving the agent without sufficient context to handle edge cases.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, which already describes content, spaceId, and noTimestamp. The description's mention of 'markdown content' is redundant with the content parameter description.

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 action: 'Add markdown content to today's daily note in Capacities.' It identifies the specific resource (daily note) and distinguishes it from siblings like create_object and save_weblink, which serve different purposes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, or when it should be avoided. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether a daily note must already exist, and does not mention any exclusions.

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