batch_read_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is a read operation, supports up to 10 notes, and returns content and frontmatter. However, it does not describe error handling for missing paths or partial failures, which is relevant for batch operations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and limit, and contains no extraneous information. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool has a modest complexity with three parameters and no output schema. The description explains the return payload (content and frontmatter) and the maximum batch size, which covers the core context. It does not describe the exact response structure, but for a batch read operation this is acceptable given the schema richness.

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%, with each parameter having a clear description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions returning content and frontmatter, which aligns with the includeContent and includeFrontmatter defaults, but does not elaborate on parameter usage.

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 tool reads multiple notes at once with a maximum of 10, and returns content and frontmatter. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'read_note' which reads a single note. Specific verb and resource are present with no ambiguity.

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 usage for batch reading notes ('Read multiple notes at once') and clearly sets a limit of 10. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the context is clear since reading multiple notes is the obvious scenario.

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