List notes for a parent entity

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only behavior and non-exhaustive nature are disclosed. The description is consistent with these hints but adds no additional context (e.g., pagination, auth needs, ordering, or handling of missing entities).

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 sentence that front-loads the action and scope. No filler words or redundancy.

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?

The description is too brief for a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema. It doesn't mention supported entity types, pagination, or what 'with' controls. While sibling tools and annotations provide some context, the description alone is insufficient for selecting and invoking correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not. It only references 'entity ID' while ignoring the required entity_type parameter and optional with/page/limit. The enum and other parameters are left to the schema entirely.

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 a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('notes') and scope ('for a specific entity ID'), distinguishing it from a general notes list. However, it does not explicitly mention the entity_type parameter or alternatives like kommo_notes_list, which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kommo_notes_list (all notes) or kommo_notes_get (single note). The 'for a specific entity ID' phrasing implies a use case, but there are no explicit alternative references or exclusions.

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