list-notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. Saying 'List all notes' is misleading because the schema includes pagination parameters (page, limit), implying results are paginated rather than 'all' at once. There is no mention of ordering, error conditions, or the shape of the response.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It states the essential purpose succinctly.

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 read-only list tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description gives the core context but leaves gaps. It does not disclose that results are paginated, how to interpret the response, or any caveats. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, additional clarity would be beneficial.

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 only 33% (case_id). The description adds no explanatory value for page and limit, and while case_id is described in the schema as a Filevine project ID, the description's 'specific case' is vaguer. Parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description does not help with the missing 67% of parameter semantics.

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 action (List), the resource (notes), and the scope (a specific case). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create-note and list-documents/tasks, making the tool's purpose immediately obvious.

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 alternatives. It does not mention that create-note should be used for adding notes or that list-documents/list-tasks are for other entity types. The context is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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