Find Orphan Notes

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

Annotations already indicate readonly and idempotent. Description adds behavioral details: returns counts per category and an example list capped by maxResults, full counts always reported. No contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then details. 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?

For a simple readonly tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description completely explains functionality, return structure, and parameter behavior. Annotations cover safety and idempotency.

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%. Description adds meaning for both parameters: explains the effect of includeOutlinksCheck and clarifies that maxResults caps list but not counts. This adds value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it identifies disconnected notes in the link graph, classifying into three groups: fully isolated, no-backlinks, no-outlinks. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_broken_links (broken links) and find_unused_attachments (attachments).

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?

Explicitly states use cases: 'surface abandoned notes, missing hub pages, or candidates for archiving.' Provides clear context, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools.

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