Set note.com cookie

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It states the cookie is stored and verified by default, but fails to mention whether an existing cookie is overwritten, what happens on verification failure, or any authentication side effects.

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 concise sentences with no redundant detail, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 simple tool, the description covers the core action and default behavior, but it lacks usage context relative to sibling authentication tools and does not address failure modes or the effect on existing cookies. This leaves it minimally adequate.

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 input schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description's mention that verification happens by default adds some meaning to the `verify` parameter. However, it does not elaborate on the `cookie` parameter beyond its name, leaving the semantics partially implicit.

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 it stores a note.com Cookie header in the local config file, using the specific verb 'stores' and identifying both the resource and target location. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like note_clear_cookie, which removes the cookie.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as note_auth_login or note_clear_cookie. It mentions the verification behavior but does not explain contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions for using this tool.

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