note_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update' without explaining whether this is a partial or full replacement, what happens if the note does not exist, or what the return value is. This is insufficient for a mutating tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words, making it easy to parse and appropriately front-loaded. However, its extreme brevity sacrifices essential context, so it is concise but not complete.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal to fully inform an agent about behavior, return values, or edge cases. It does not mention any prerequisites, error conditions, or effects beyond 'updates', leaving a significant gap in completeness.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only mentions 'by note id', which merely restates the id parameter. It does not explain the text parameter or add meaning beyond the parameter names and constraints in 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 'Update a note by note id' uses a specific verb (update) and resource (note), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like note_add and note_get. The scope is also clear: it targets a note by its id.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as note_add or item_update. There is no mention of preconditions, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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