append_to_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and effectively discloses the append-only behavior, explicitly stating it cannot overwrite or delete, and framing it as a safety feature. This adds meaningful context beyond a simple verb phrase.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and a Note section, making it easy to scan. It is mostly concise, though the append-only emphasis is repeated, which is slightly redundant but reinforces the key safety trait.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the operation, parameters, return value, and a behavioral caveat. Minor gaps like error cases and formatting are not critical for such a straightforward tool.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining note_id as 'the ID of the note to append to (x-coredata:// URL)' and content as 'the content to append'. This provides semantic meaning beyond the schema's plain string types, though more detail could be added.

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 'Append content to an existing note' with a specific verb and resource, and the 'APPEND ONLY - no overwrite' clarifier distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_note and get_note. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies usage for adding content to an existing note, and the append-only constraint suggests a safe operation. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, leaving the guidance implicit.

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