listNotes

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It says 'List notes' implying a read operation, but it fails to mention pagination behavior, default sorting, or rate limits. The agent cannot infer how the tool handles large result sets or what structure the response has, which are critical for correct invocation.

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 a single concise sentence with no extraneous words. It gets straight to the point, but the brevity sacrifices useful details like pagination or return format. It earns its place but is slightly underdeveloped for the tool's complexity.

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 3 parameters (including pagination controls) and no output schema, the description should cover pagination behavior, default limit, and return value format. It does none of these. The agent lacks essential context for correct use, especially since list tools typically return paginated results. The description is incomplete 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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds minimal value by restating the personId filter but does not explain interactions between parameters, defaults, or constraints. Per the rubric, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema already documents parameters adequately.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'notes', and the optional filter by personId. It's specific but lacks detail beyond the basic operation, such as what notes are or any scope limitations. Still, it effectively differentiates from sibling tools like listPeople or listDeals.

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 implies usage for listing notes with an optional person filter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like getNote for a single note or createNote for adding. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided, which is a gap for an agent deciding between tools.

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