aliases

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

The description only says 'List aliases' with no behavioral details. No annotations are present to compensate. The tool's scope (e.g., listing for a specific note or entire vault) and side effects are not disclosed, making it opaque.

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?

While the description is extremely concise at three words, it is under-specified for a tool with 8 parameters. Conciseness is valued, but here it forfeits necessary information. The description does not earn its place due to lack of substance.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and minimal description, the definition is woefully incomplete. The agent cannot determine proper invocation or interpret results without additional context.

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 input schema has 8 parameters with only 13% description coverage (only 'vault' has a description). The description does not explain any parameter meanings, leaving the agent to guess the purpose of 'file', 'path', 'format', etc. This is a critical gap.

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 'List aliases.' clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'aliases,' which is specific. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like tags or links, which might have similar listing behavior. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools, the absence of usage context leaves the agent without direction on choosing aliases over, e.g., tags or links.

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