autotask_search_project_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It states 'search' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limiting, or whether the search supports full-text or keyword filtering. The schema provides pageSize and max results, but the description is silent on behavioral details.

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 extremely concise with one sentence. No wasted words; it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool is a simple search with two parameters (both well-documented in schema), no output schema, and clear sibling tools, the description is mostly complete. It could mention that results may be paginated or indicate the type of notes (e.g., project notes only), but overall it suffices.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameters. It does not explain how pageSize affects results or what format projectId should follow.

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 the tool searches for notes on a specific project. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'autotask_get_project_note' (which retrieves a single note) and 'autotask_search_company_notes' (which searches company-wide). However, it does not explicitly note that it is scoped to a single project.

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 implies the tool should be used when you need to find notes for a project, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It also does not mention alternatives like 'autotask_get_project_note' for retrieving a specific note or 'autotask_search_company_notes' for cross-project search.

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