append_to_active_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the append action and offers no details about side effects, prerequisites (e.g., having an active note), error handling, or what happens if no active note exists. This is a mutation tool and lacks meaningful 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 two short sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the core action and includes a usage hint, making it appropriately sized and efficient.

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 simple nature of the tool and full parameter schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain what constitutes an 'active note', whether a note must be open, or the behavior when no active note exists. These gaps could lead to incorrect usage in 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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters content and ensureNewline are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, hence baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (append) and resource (currently active note in Obsidian), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like append_to_note which likely target a specific note path. The phrase 'currently active note' provides a specific scope.

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 when to use this tool: when you want to quickly add content to the note you're working on, without needing to specify a path. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context of 'active note' versus specific note tools provides clear usage intent.

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