list_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states a read operation ('List'), but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, performance implications, or whether the operation is safe. Minimal transparency.

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 short and well-structured: a one-line purpose, then Args section, then Returns. Every sentence provides necessary information, no redundancy. Front-loaded with the main action.

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?

With 2 optional parameters, no annotations, and an output schema present (so return values are covered), the description is adequate for a simple listing tool. However, it lacks details on pagination, ordering, or whether folder supports wildcards. Given many sibling tools, slightly more context would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains 'folder' as an optional folder name and 'max_results' as a maximum notes limit (with default 25, max 200). This adds meaning beyond the schema's property definitions. However, it doesn't clarify if folder is name or ID, or any format constraints.

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 'List Apple Notes, optionally filtered by folder.' The verb 'list' and resource 'Apple Notes' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_notes', 'get_note', 'create_note', etc., which have 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?

The description implies usage (listing notes, optionally filtering), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'search_notes' or 'get_note'. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. Adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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