create_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses auto-generated UUID, return type ('Created note as dict'), and format constraints (tags lowercase/hyphenated, category as path). It does not mention side effects or preconditions, but for a creation tool, this is fairly 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?

The description is extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a structured Args and Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and the front-loaded purpose makes it easy to scan.

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, the description includes return info. It covers creation, parameters, and return type. However, it lacks details on error conditions or idempotency, which would improve completeness for a simple creation tool.

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 compensate. It provides clear, helpful descriptions for all four parameters: title, content, tags (with format constraint), and category (with example). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and default information.

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 'Create a new note with auto-generated UUID,' specifying the verb (create), resource (note), and a key behavioral detail (auto-generated UUID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_note, delete_note, and read_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?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_note). It only describes the tool's purpose, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and siblings.

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