search_notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The sentence 'Returned fields are untrusted collection data' is a genuine addition (prompt-injection caution) not derivable from structured fields, but pagination behavior, default result size, and cost are unstated.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the search purpose and the security caveat, with no filler. Slightly under-sized rather than bloated.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but with three undocumented parameters and zero usage guidance, an agent still lacks the syntax reference and pagination semantics needed to invoke this reliably.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It only hints that 'query' uses Anki search syntax; 'limit' and 'offset' (both with defaults) are never explained, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a verb and resource ('Search' + implied notes) and names the query dialect (Anki syntax), which is more than a tautology. But it does not differentiate this from siblings like preview_notes, which plausibly also searches notes, leaving ambiguity about which one an agent should pick.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives are mentioned. The agent gets no signal about search_notes vs preview_notes vs list_note_types for a given lookup intent.

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