Search by Folder

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context beyond annotations: sorting by most recently modified, return format as JSON array with specific fields, error behavior (empty array for missing folder), and folder prefix matching. Minor gaps: sorting direction not specified, 'additional_properties' vague.

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?

Well-structured with sections for purpose, example, when-to-use, parameter details, errors, and return format. Front-loaded with purpose. Slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. Could be tightened without losing clarity.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain return values. It lists fields (path, title, tags, etc.) and sorting. Also covers error case (empty array). However, 'additional_properties' is vague and sorting direction is omitted. Still quite complete for a browsing tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning: folder is matched as prefix without trailing slash, recursive defaults to true, limit defaults to 20. It also provides an example call. This is additive and helpful.

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 browses notes in a folder with full metadata, distinguishing it from vault_list_notes which returns only paths. The verb 'browse' and resource 'notes in a folder' are specific and actionable.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (exploring folder contents) and when to prefer alternatives: vault_list_notes for paths, vault_search for text queries, and backlinks/outgoing links for connections. This helps the agent select the correct tool.

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