list_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (per_page and page) and implies a read-only action via the verb 'List.' However, it does not provide additional behavioral context such as sorting, ordering, or any potential side effects, leaving gaps.

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 starts with a concise purpose statement and then provides a structured Args list. There is no unnecessary text, and the content is well-organized for quick reading.

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?

For a simple paginated list tool, the description covers the core purpose and all parameters. An output schema is present, so return values need not be described. It lacks explicit usage guidance but is otherwise sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, and the description compensates with an Args block that explains each parameter purpose: contact_id is a Nimble contact ID, per_page controls results per page, and page indicates page number. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema titles, though it redundantly repeats the default values already present in the schema.

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 a specific verb+resource+scope: 'List notes for a specific contact.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_note (single note retrieval) and create_note/update_note (write operations).

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?

Usage is implied by the wording ('for a specific contact'), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_note or list_activities. The description does not mention any exclusions or alternative tool recommendations.

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