Apple Notes MCP

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering key behavioral traits. The description adds minimal context by specifying it affects 'write ops,' but doesn't elaborate on side effects, permissions, or system impact beyond what annotations provide.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words, front-loading the core action. It's appropriately sized for a simple toggle tool with one parameter.

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 low complexity (1 boolean parameter) and the presence of annotations and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on system-wide implications or error conditions, which could be helpful for safe mode management.

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 0%, but there's only one parameter (safe) with a boolean type. The description implies 'safe' controls read-only mode for writes, adding some meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition. However, it doesn't detail default states or effects, keeping it at a baseline level.

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 verb ('Enable/disable') and resource ('safe (read-only) mode for write ops'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its siblings (like server.status or various notes/folders tools), which would require a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. It merely restates the action without context, leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios.

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