notes_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions HTML formatting support, but fails to address critical aspects like required permissions (e.g., Apple Notes app access), mutation effects (creation is irreversible), error handling, or rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Create a new note') and includes essential details (app, title/body content, HTML support) without redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and HTML feature, but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, errors) and output expectations, which are critical given the tool's complexity and lack of structured metadata.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters (title, body, folder). The description adds minimal value by mentioning HTML formatting for the body, which is already covered in the schema's description for the body parameter. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Create a new note'), resource ('in Apple Notes app'), and scope ('with title and body content'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like notes_append (which modifies existing notes) and notes_search (which retrieves notes).

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 creating notes with HTML formatting, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like notes_append (for adding to existing notes) or calendar_create_event (for different resource types). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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