remarkable_browse

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about return values (names, types, dates, tags) and the effect of REMARKABLE_ROOT_PATH, but does not exceed what annotations already imply for safety.

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-organized with usecase, instructions, parameters, and examples sections. Every sentence adds value, and the content is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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's simplicity (3 optional parameters, no required params) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: modes, parameter defaults, configuration note, and multiple examples.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the role of each parameter: path for folder navigation, query for search activation, tags for filtering. It also describes the interaction between parameters (e.g., query and tags working together).

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 tool is for browsing or searching the reMarkable library. It defines three distinct modes (browse, search, filter by tags) which differentiate it from siblings like remarkable_search and remarkable_recent.

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 provides explicit instructions for when to use each mode, including default behavior and optional parameters. It also mentions the REMARKABLE_ROOT_PATH configuration. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool in favor of a sibling.

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