update_note

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only states the action. It does not mention whether the note ID is required (though id is not in required array), what happens if the note doesn't exist, whether changes are irreversible, or any rate limits. Lacks critical safety and side-effect information.

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 sentence with no wasted words, making it efficient. It could be slightly improved by adding a second sentence about optional parameters or usage, but it remains concise and front-loaded.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or how to use the mode parameter effectively. For a mutation tool, this lacks the context an agent needs to safely and correctly invoke it.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the 'mode' enum (replace, append, prepend) beyond the schema's 'Update mode' label. However, it does not elaborate on the 'id', 'title', 'account', or 'content' parameters beyond their schema descriptions, so the added semantic value is moderate.

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 updates a note's content and specifies three modes (replace, append, prepend), distinguishing it from creation, deletion, or retrieval tools. However, it omits that the tool can also update title and account fields, which are present in the input schema, making the purpose slightly narrower than the actual capability.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_note or delete_note. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., note must exist) or contexts where append/prepend are preferred over replace. The description assumes the agent already knows when to invoke it.

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