Add Note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does so by disclosing the mutating effect (creating a new note) and the return value (the new id). It does not discuss persistence, error conditions, or ownership, but for a simple create operation the core side effects are clear.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key return detail. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 2-parameter CRUD tool with no output schema, the description plus full schema coverage is nearly sufficient: an agent knows what to pass and what to expect back. The only missing contextual element is explicit routing among note-related siblings.

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% and both title and content already have descriptive schema text ('Short title for the note,' 'Body content of the note'). The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline score 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 states a specific operation — create a note — and adds the result behavior 'return its id.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like notes_get, notes_list, and notes_delete.

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 intended use is implied by 'Create a new note': an agent would call this when it needs to add a note. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions such as using notes_list to browse existing notes.

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