search-notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the hybrid vector + full-text search behavior, which is valuable, but does not mention any other behavioral aspects (e.g., read-only, result limits). The disclosure of the hybrid method adds meaningful context beyond the tool name.

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, well-front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the primary action, the target, and the key behavioral nuance (hybrid search) in a compact form.

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 tool has one parameter and an output schema exists, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does and its unique search method. It does not detail output format, but that is not required when an output schema is present.

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 has only one parameter with no description, but the tool description explains that the query is used for searching 'by meaning and by text', giving purpose to the parameter. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' with a clear resource 'notes' and distinguishes the tool by specifying the hybrid method ('by meaning and by text (hybrid vector + full-text search)'). This clearly sets it apart from siblings like list-notes or get-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?

The description implies when to use the tool: when you need to find notes by meaning or text. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide between search and other note-related tools.

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