seam_notes_view

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds useful behavioral context: it reserves and changes nothing, excludes notes from other branches, includes notes another session has taken, and omits unknown ids. It does not describe return format, but an output schema exists.

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 front-loaded with the core read-only purpose and then covers filtering and alternatives. It is dense and slightly run-on, but every sentence contributes useful selection or usage information.

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?

Given one optional parameter, full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description provides everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers scope, branch filtering, unknown ids, and the relationship to sibling tools.

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 single ids parameter is already documented. The description reinforces that ids select specific notes and that omitting ids returns all unresolved notes on the checked-out branch, but it adds little beyond the schema.

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: read the user's review notes without taking them. It clearly distinguishes this from seam_notes (taking notes) and seam_reply (answering notes), and specifies scope by ids or unresolved notes on the checked-out branch.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool to look before taking or to see what was answered. It also names the alternatives and the required sequence for answering notes: take them with seam_notes first and reply with seam_reply.

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