Get Note

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds that full mode returns parsed frontmatter, tags, and body, while fragment modes skip frontmatter/tags and return raw text. No contradictions.

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 concise paragraph, efficiently structured by mode. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to scan.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure for each mode (e.g., full note includes frontmatter, tags, body; fragments return raw text). It covers main behaviors but could clarify behavior when multiple fragment modes are specified.

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%, and the description adds value by explaining the purpose of each fragment parameter (e.g., 'section' supports path-form like 'Tasks/Today', 'block' expects id without '^', 'lines' is 1-indexed inclusive). This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 reads a note and details multiple modes (full, section, block, lines). It specifies the resource (a note) and actions (returning content with frontmatter/tags or fragments), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_attachment or get_backlinks.

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 explains when to use each fragment mode (section, block, lines) and mentions token efficiency for long notes. While it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use, the context is clear for selecting the appropriate mode.

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