list_indexed_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 the tool lists indexed notes with timestamps, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly state no side effects, rate limits, or prerequisites.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. It is concise but could benefit from additional context about the output format or ordering. However, for a zero-parameter tool, it is appropriately sized.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is the sole source of information. It covers the purpose and output fields (timestamp), but lacks details on pagination, ordering, or what 'indexed' means. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent seeking to understand behavior.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. It correctly implies that no input is needed.

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 lists all indexed notes and includes the last indexed timestamp. The verb 'list' and resource 'notes that have been indexed' are specific and distinguish this from sibling tools like 'list_files' which presumably list all files, or 'search_vault'.

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 versus alternatives like 'search_vault' or 'list_files'. Since the tool has no parameters, usage is self-evident, but there is no mention of exclusions or context.

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