List notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses meaningful behaviors: period filters use region overlap, timeless notes are excluded from period filters, and old installs return an empty list. This goes beyond the bare minimum, though it omits details like pagination or ordering.

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 compact and information-dense, with no filler. It front-loads the core resource definition, then explains optional filters and edge-case behavior in a logical order. Every sentence contributes meaningful guidance.

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?

Given the tool has only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what notes contain, how filtering behaves, how to list everything, and a backwards-compatibility edge case. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke this tool confidently.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining overlap semantics for the 'period' parameter, the 'none' folder sentinel, and the distinction between timed and timeless notes, all of which complement rather than merely repeat schema descriptions.

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 identifies the tool's purpose as listing user notes, with a specific verb and resource. It details note contents (title, body excerpt, timestamps, folder, pin) and distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_categories and list_tags.

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?

Provides clear usage guidance: using 'period' to scope timed notes, omitting it to list all notes, and using folder filters with the special 'none' value. Does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the contextual direction is strong.

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