add_note

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

No annotations exist, so the description alone discloses behavioral traits: notes persist across sessions and appear in wrap context. However, it does not mention editability or deletion, which are relevant for a creation tool.

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 three sentences long, front-loads the purpose, then adds usage and behavioral context. It is efficient and well-structured, though slightly repetitive.

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 tool with 2 parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and a key behavioral trait, but the lack of parameter explanations leaves a significant gap in completeness.

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%, yet the description provides no information about the two parameters ('summary' and 'location'), leaving the agent to infer their meaning from names alone.

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 uses specific verbs ('Record') and resources ('gotcha, setup detail, durable context'), and explicitly contrasts with sibling tools 'issue' and 'decision', making its purpose clear and distinct.

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 guidance on when to use ('when you discover something important that doesn't fit as an issue or decision') and implies persistence behavior, but lacks exhaustive exclusions for all sibling tools like 'get_context' or 'get_global_gotchas'.

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