Read note

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys that this is a simple read, but says nothing about error behavior when the note is missing, whether contents are returned in full, encoding/path constraints, or permissions.

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 scope and lookup key arrive 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-parameter read with no output schema, the description is minimally viable but omits what a caller needs at the edges: the failure mode for a missing file and any hint about the returned content shape.

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 schema gives zero coverage — just a bare string named 'name'. The description usefully disambiguates that 'name' means the file name (not a note title or ID) and that it is resolved within the notes directory, which is real added meaning.

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 and resource ('Read one note') plus the lookup key ('by file name') and location ('notes directory'). It is clear what the tool does, though it never names list_notes or search_notes to contrast itself explicitly.

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?

'By file name' implies the precondition that the caller already knows the exact file, which weakly implies that list_notes/search_notes should be used otherwise. No alternative is named and no when-not condition is stated.

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