add_note

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Not idempotent: repeated calls add duplicate notes' restates that but usefully spells out the concrete consequence. Beyond the annotations, it adds that notes are internal/not customer-visible and that it returns the created note, which is genuine extra context.

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 tight sentences with no waste: purpose first, then the non-idempotency caveat, then the internal-vs-customer distinction and return value. Front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 write tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, idempotency behavior, audience/internal semantics, and return value. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (text, lead_id) are already documented, including how to obtain the lead ID. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Add') plus resource ('plain text (common) note') and the target location ('a lead's timeline'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from send_chat_message, so an agent can tell it apart from the messaging sibling without opening either 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?

Gives clear context and an explicit alternative: notes are internal and not sent to the customer, and send_chat_message is named for customer-facing messages. It does not cover other adjacent choices (e.g., task vs note), but the primary routing decision is unambiguous.

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