list_vault_notes

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

With no annotations, the description entirely bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without detailing retrieval behavior, pagination, sorting, or prerequisites. The limit parameter's cap (200 rows) is not mentioned.

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 clear sentence, efficiently conveying the core purpose. It is well front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. However, it may be too terse given the lack of behavioral details.

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?

Considering the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema present), the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain the return structure or behavior constraints (e.g., limit cap, whether results are ordered). Some gaps remain.

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% (both parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already documents the purpose of vault_path and limit. Baseline score of 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 'List text notes found in the configured vault', specifying the verb ('list'), resource ('text notes'), and scope ('configured vault'). It is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 (e.g., get_vault_note_context or search_vault_blocks). The description neither suggests appropriate contexts nor excludes inappropriate ones.

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