backup-note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It discloses side effects (writes to disk, returns file path), failure modes (zero or multiple title matches), and scoping behavior via folder. It stops short of explicitly stating that the note is not modified, but 'snapshot' strongly implies non-destructiveness.

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?

Three sentences, with the core action front-loaded. No redundant phrases. Every clause adds value, from the action to the failure conditions to the parameter guidance.

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 a 2-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage timing, error behavior, and parameter semantics. It also notes the folder scoping option. The output schema supplies return type, so the description need not repeat it.

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%, but the description fully compensates: 'matched by exact title' explains the title parameter, and 'Pass `folder` to scope the lookup to a single folder' explains the folder parameter. Both parameter meanings are clarified beyond the bare 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 verb 'Snapshot', the resource 'HTML body of a note', and the action 'to disk and return the file path'. It also specifies exact-title matching, which distinguishes it from siblings like get-note or update-note.

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 usage context: 'Useful before risky multi-step edits.' It also explains failure conditions and folder scoping. However, it does not explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks full exclusions.

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