add_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool adds a note, requires existing deck/model, and returns a new note ID. It does not cover error cases or side effects of parameters like 'allow_duplicate', but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with 'Add a single note'. Every sentence adds value. Example included efficiently.

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 and nested objects, the description covers the primary behavior and most important parameter. It notes the return value (note ID). Lacks detail on the 'allow_duplicate' parameter and error handling, but overall sufficient for an experienced user.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It only explains the 'fields' parameter with an example ('e.g. {"Front": "...", "Back": "..."}') and implies deck/model purpose by stating they must exist. Tags and allow_duplicate are not described. Adds value for one key parameter but incomplete for the others.

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?

Description clearly states 'Add a single note', includes specific and actionable details about the 'fields' parameter, and distinguishes from sibling 'add_notes' by emphasizing singularity. Verbatim: 'Add 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?

Description implies context by mentioning prerequisites (deck and model must exist) and specifying 'single note', which contrasts with batch alternatives. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternative tools.

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