get_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it lists notes, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, if there are pagination limits, ordering, or what happens when no filters match. This is insufficient for a safe and correct invocation.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single purpose statement and a structured parameter list. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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 parameters, 1 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the basic behavior and parameter mapping. However, it does not clarify how filters combine (AND/OR) or mention ordering/pagination, which are important for correct usage. It is minimally complete but has gaps.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'tags' is an OR match and 'step_id' filters by step, and identifies 'campaign_id' as a UUID. This adds meaning beyond the schema titles, but does not clarify the expected format for tags (array) or that step_id is an integer. The description provides moderate added value.

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's action ('List notes') and resource ('notes'), and specifies that it can be filtered by 'tag or step'. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from similar tools like 'search_notes' and 'add_note', though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_notes' or 'get_campaign'. It lacks explicit context about when to prefer this tool or any exclusions or prerequisites.

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