Add client note

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive mutation with open-world behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the note is visible to the team only, the client is not notified, it applies across all locations, and line breaks become paragraphs. It does not cover permissions or response behavior, but the added context is substantial.

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 three short sentences, front-loads the core action, and each sentence contributes useful information: purpose, destination/scope, and visibility/formatting behavior. There is no redundant restatement of the name or schema.

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 two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety hints, the description is complete enough. It explains visibility, notification behavior, location scope, and text formatting, leaving little an agent needs to infer before calling 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds semantics beyond the schema by explaining that line breaks in the text become paragraphs and that the note applies to all locations, which clarifies formatting behavior and implies there is no location-scoping parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: adding a note to a client's profile. It also specifies the destination (Notes tab), scope (all locations), and visibility (team only), so an agent can understand exactly what the tool does without opening the schema.

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 this tool is for internal team notes by saying the client is not told and only the team sees it. However, it does not give explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives for communicating with clients, so usage is only implied.

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