search_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only indicates a read operation ('search'), but does not explain what constitutes a keyword match (substring, exact, etc.), what fields are returned, or if pagination exists. The missing parameter for the keyword contradicts the description's implied input.

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 short sentence, which is efficient for a simple tool. However, it may be too brief, bordering on under-specification, but it does not contain unnecessary 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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate. It fails to explain how to provide the keyword (no input parameter), what the output looks like, or which notes are searched. This incomplete specification leaves the agent unable to invoke the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description bears no responsibility for documenting them. The mention of 'keyword' in the text suggests an input mechanism, but since it's absent from the schema, the description adds no useful parameter semantics beyond what the schema conveys (no parameters).

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 'Search notes by keyword' clearly states a verb ('Search') and resource ('notes'), and distinguishes it from sibling search tools like 'search_contacts' by specifying the resource type. However, it could be more specific about which notes application (e.g., Apple Notes) is targeted.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_notes' or 'read_note'. The description does not clarify the difference between searching and listing, nor does it mention any constraints or prerequisites.

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