list_notes

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes a read operation but omits details like whether results are paginated beyond schema defaults, sort order, or rate limits. The description is functionally adequate but minimally informative.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with purpose. However, it could be slightly expanded to include a brief note on pagination or scope without losing conciseness.

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 list tool with 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It does not clarify default behavior (e.g., whether archived are excluded by default), pagination limits, or sort order. It covers the basics but leaves gaps.

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 each parameter is already explained in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema, thus the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List all NotePM notes' with a specific verb and resource, and specifies the returned fields (note codes, names, descriptions). It serves as a distinct listing operation among siblings like get_page (single retrieval) and search_pages (filtered retrieval).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings such as search_pages or list_folders. There is no mention of context (e.g., 'Use for broad retrieval; for filtered results use search_pages').

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