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. "List" implies a read-only operation and the parenthetical discloses the kind of items returned, but nothing is said about permissions, ordering, pagination, or whether all notes are returned when page is omitted.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action, resource, and scope caveat all land immediately.

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 one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials but leaves the return shape and the default (all pages) unstated. An agent can call it, but not fully predict the result set.

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 0% for the single `page` parameter, so the description must compensate, and it does minimally by stating the parameter is optional and scopes results to one page. It does not say what format the page identifier takes or what happens when it is omitted.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (canvas notes) and clarifies what counts as a note — titles and sticky notes — which disambiguates the term. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_boards or list_comments, but the resource is concrete enough to select it.

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?

"Optionally for one page" implies the page-scoping use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance versus siblings such as read_board, get_selection, or list_pages. Usage is only inferable.

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