search_notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: mentions fuzzy matching, pagination, and sorting options. No contradictions. With annotations covering safety, the description provides useful extra context, justifying a 4.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence introduces purpose and key capabilities; the second provides a concrete usage example and a cross-reference to list_tags. Everything earns its place, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 tool with 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and provides key usage patterns. It does not detail return format but given the complexity and the rich schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively. A 4 is warranted.

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%, meaning every parameter is already well-documented in the schema. The description adds a usage example (sort_by='modifydate' with limit=1) but does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameters 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 clearly states the verb 'Search' and resource 'notes' in Simplenote, lists advanced capabilities (fuzzy matching, pagination, sorting), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like list_notes (which just lists) and get_note (which gets a single note). It is specific and complete.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on how to find the most recently updated note (sort_by, sort_direction, limit combination) and suggests using list_tags first to discover tags. While it does not specify when not to use this tool, the context given is clear and actionable, earning a 4.

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