list_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that the endpoint is undocumented and best-effort, confirms live behavior, states default limit=100, and explains cursor-based pagination with _metadata.next — substantial behavioral context beyond a plain list action.

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 longer than most but each sentence earns its place: purpose, undocumented caveat, fallback, default, and cursor pagination. It front-loads the core purpose and keeps important warnings integrated without rambling.

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 4-parameter list tool with no output schema, this is complete enough to invoke correctly: it covers filtering, pagination, default limit, and risk mitigation. The absence of return-shape details is partly mitigated by explicitly referencing _metadata.next as the pagination source.

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 already documents all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the limit default, the cursor-vs-offset pagination semantics for `next`, and the confirmed personId filtering behavior, which helps an agent use the parameters correctly.

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?

States a clear verb and resource ('List notes') and identifies the optional filter by person, and explicitly frames this as the plural GET /notes versus the documented GET /notes/{id}, so an agent can distinguish it from get_note. The undocumented status is flagged upfront.

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 gives concrete usage context: use it to list notes optionally filtered by personId, and if the undocumented endpoint breaks, fall back to get_note by id. It doesn't enumerate all alternatives, but the most relevant sibling and fallback condition are explicit.

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