List Notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds details on filtering and pagination, which are behavioral traits not in annotations. It does not specify return format or edge cases, but with an output schema present and the provided context, the description adds moderate value beyond annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then details. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy. It is suitably concise for a simple listing operation.

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's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and comprehensive parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the key behavior (list, filter, paginate) without needing to restate return structure or error handling, which are expected to be in the schema.

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%: each parameter (limit, offset, folder) is described with default values and constraints. The description mentions pagination and folder filter but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema carries the full parameter documentation.

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 action (list), resource (all notes), and the specific data returned (title, folder, dates). It distinguishes from siblings like read_note (single note) and search_notes (search for specific criteria) by indicating a full listing operation.

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 context about optional folder filtering and pagination, implying this tool is for broad enumeration. However, it does not explicitly instruct when to use this versus search_notes or read_note, nor does it mention exclusions. The usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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