get_note

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

No annotations are provided, but the description covers key behaviors: smart truncation for long notes and sequential reading by line ranges. This adds behavioral context beyond the schema, though it lacks detail on authentication or rate limits.

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 with two main sentences and bullet points. Every sentence adds value, front-loading the primary purpose and key behaviors without redundancy.

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?

Given the 7 parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the main behaviors (smart display, sequential reading) and parameter usage. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's functionality.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the 'smart display' logic behind toc_only/force_full and the 'sequential reading' feature related to start_line/line_count, enhancing understanding beyond the 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 retrieves a note with smart content display and sequential reading support, distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_notes or create_note. The verb 'retrieve' and the specific resource 'note' are explicit.

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 explains smart behavior and sequential reading, providing context for when to use parameters like toc_only or start_line. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., find_notes for search) or include exclusions.

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