add_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Save a quick note or thought to the vault,' which is minimal. It does not mention whether the note is saved to a specific location, if it can be overwritten, any authentication needs, rate limits, or what the return value looks like (despite an output schema existing).

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 extremely concise with two sentences and no superfluous words. Every sentence serves a purpose: the first states the action, the second gives a usage tip for tags.

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 has 2 parameters and an output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain where in the vault the note is saved, if there are limits on content length, or the format of the response. The output schema exists but the description offers no context about 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It partially does by explaining tags: 'Use tags to make it easy to find later, e.g. ["work", "idea", "todo"].' However, it does not explain the 'content' parameter beyond being a note/thought, and no constraints or format details are provided. This partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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's purpose: 'Save a quick note or thought to the vault.' It uses a specific verb ('save') and resource ('note/thought'), and distinguishes it from siblings like add_bookmark (bookmark), search_notes (search), list_notes (list), and delete_note (delete).

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where add_note is preferred over search_notes, list_notes, or delete_note, nor does it indicate prerequisites or exclusions.

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