list_notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that invalid sort_by returns an error dict, and that tags must all match. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, the structure of note summaries, or that it is a read-only operation. Adequate but incomplete behavioral disclosure.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses a clear Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds value. Slightly verbose in the Args list but appropriately formatted.

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's complexity (4 optional parameters) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential input semantics and the error case. It lacks guidance on when to prefer this over search_notes, but that falls under usage guidelines. Overall sufficient for correct invocation.

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 fully compensates by explaining each parameter: tags (all must match), category (prefix), sort_by (allowed values and default), limit (default and max). This adds meaning far beyond the schema's bare property names and defaults.

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 'List notes with optional filtering,' which identifies the verb (list) and resource (notes). It distinguishes itself from read_note (single note) and search_notes (full-text search) but does not explicitly name alternatives, so it's clear but not differentiated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_notes or list_tags/list_categories. The description focuses on parameters but does not explain the selection criteria (e.g., when to filter by tags vs. search). This leaves the agent to infer usage.

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