notes_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a read operation (implied by 'Search'), returns up to 100 notes with excerpts, and supports filtering. However, it doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: first sentence defines the core functionality, second sentence adds important behavioral constraints. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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 search tool with 3 parameters and 100% schema coverage but no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains what gets searched, filtering capability, and result limits. However, without an output schema, it could better describe the return format beyond 'notes with excerpts'.

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 already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'filtering by folder' and 'up to 100 notes' which relates to the limit parameter, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema.

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 ('Search notes by keyword'), target resource ('notes'), and scope ('in title or body'), distinguishing it from siblings like notes_create or notes_append. It explicitly mentions what gets searched and what is returned.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (searching notes by keyword with optional folder filtering) but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. It distinguishes from non-search siblings but doesn't compare to reminders_search or other search tools.

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