Get note.com note

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses that the default response is compact summary fields and that responseFormat:'full' or includeBody:true yields the full body. This adds behavioral context beyond the schema, but it does not cover permissions, error handling, or nuances of the return payload.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by a useful clarification. No filler or redundant content.

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?

The description covers core behavior and the summary/full distinction, which is sufficient for basic use. However, it omits the 'fields' parameter, does not describe return structure or error cases, and lacks guidance for alternative tools, leaving gaps for a fully autonomous agent.

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?

The description explains noteKey with a concrete example and clarifies how responseFormat and includeBody affect output. Given 0% schema coverage, this meaningfully compensates, though the 'fields' parameter remains undocumented and unexplained.

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 'Fetches a note by note key' with an example key, identifying the action and resource. Although there is a sibling note_get_draft, the description doesn't explicitly differentiate between published notes and drafts, but the tool name and context make the purpose reasonably clear.

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 when a note key is available, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like note_get_draft or note_list_my_notes. It does not mention exclusions or alternative tool recommendations.

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