append_note

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it is a direct SQLite write and that the app must be quit, which are significant behavioral traits. However, it does not cover error conditions or permissions.

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 concise at four sentences, with the main purpose in the first line. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is logical 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 presence of sibling tools and an output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects and differentiation. However, it lacks details on parameters like 'dry_run' and 'content_format', and does not mention prerequisites such as the note existing.

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 descriptive coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'heading' parameter and implies 'content', but does not describe 'dry_run', 'note_id', or 'content_format' in detail. The purpose of 'dry_run' and the effect of 'content_format' are not addressed.

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 'note', and explicitly contrasts with 'update_note' which replaces content. This differentiates it from its sibling and provides a specific purpose.

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 gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus 'update_note' (for appending vs replacing). It also notes safety for rich/image-heavy notes. However, it does not specify when not to use it or provide exclusions beyond that.

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