slipbox_get_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose return content ('full note content including metadata, tags, and links') and identifier semantics ('either the note ID ... or exact title'). However, it does not mention behavior on non-existent notes or potential ambiguity between ID and title formats, leaving some gaps.

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 concise and front-loaded, starting with the primary purpose, then outlining return value and usage. The Args section is clear and every sentence serves a purpose with no wasted words.

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 (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core aspects: what it does, how to use the parameter, what to expect in return, and when to use it. Missing details about error handling are minor for a retrieval tool.

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 schema has no description for the parameter, so the description compensates by explaining that 'identifier' can be either a note ID (with example) or an exact title. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema field.

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 'Retrieve a note by ID or title', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search, update, and delete by specifying a read operation for a single note.

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?

It provides explicit guidance: 'Use this to read note contents before creating links or updates.' This gives a clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as for searching by keywords.

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