list_notes

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe read-only nature. The description adds useful context by indicating only vendor-shared notes in a workspace are returned and giving examples like meeting notes and AI recaps. It does not disclose ordering, pagination, or edge cases, but the annotation lowers the burden.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the resource, scope, content examples, and portal mapping without repeating schema details or annotations.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with full parameter descriptions and a readOnlyHint, the description is mostly complete: it explains what kind of notes are returned and where they appear. It could mention return shape or more explicit list behavior, but the low complexity and supported schema make this a minor gap.

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 schema already documents workspace_id and origin. The description's mention of 'in a workspace' loosely aligns with workspace_id, but it does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. 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 identifies the resource and scope: notes the vendor has shared with you in a workspace, pointing to the portal's Notes tab. It is not a tautology and distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_messages or list_attachments by content type, though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'lists' or 'retrieves.'

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_messages, list_meetings, or list_attachments. It implies the intended context through 'in a workspace' and 'Notes tab,' but never states exclusions or conditions that would help an agent choose it over similar list tools.

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