Pin note

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

The only annotation is openWorldHint=true, indicating side effects, but the description adds no specifics about what pinning does—such as whether it affects note ordering, visibility, or if there are restrictions. No behavioral traits beyond the broad annotation are disclosed.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently states the core action. However, it may be too terse to convey important context, but that is a completeness issue, not a conciseness/structure issue.

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 state-changing tool, the description is minimal. It does not explain the semantics of pinning, what outcome to expect, how it relates to unpinning, or any failure modes. The openWorldHint annotation signals side effects but does not specify them, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool correctly beyond the obvious.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (note_id, entity_id, entity_type). While the parameter names and the enum for entity_type provide some implicit context, the description fails to compensate for the lack of 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 'Pin a note on an entity' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action of pinning a note to an entity. It is concise and understandable, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kommo_notes_unpin in the description text itself.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or comparisons to related operations like unpinning or listing notes. The sibling list includes kommo_notes_unpin, but the description does not reference it.

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