log_event

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses side effects (stored as note type, indexed) and a behavioral detail (first line becomes title). Lacks info on auth, rate limits, or potential destruction, but for a simple write tool this is adequate.

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, no filler, front-loaded with the core action and followed by usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 write tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and storage behavior. Could mention return value or confirmation, but the note indexing detail provides sufficient feedback expectation.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three params. Description adds extra value by explaining that the first line of 'text' becomes the title (truncated to 200 chars), which is not in the schema. Tags and people descriptions in schema are sufficient.

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?

Specifies a concrete action ('Record a manual note') with clear resource ('note') and differentiators (type=note, source=manual). Distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are predominantly read/search operations.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the user dictates context you want recallable later.' Does not state when not to use or name specific alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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