prepend_note

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and nondestructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the specific behavioral detail 'just after the title line', which is beyond annotations. 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?

Description is a single sentence (12 words) and front-loaded. However, it omits parameter explanations, which would add value without much length increase.

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?

With an output schema present, return value explanation is not needed. However, the description lacks usage guidelines and parameter details, making it somewhat incomplete for a tool with two required params.

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 0% and description does not explain the 'id' parameter (likely note identifier) or 'text' parameter beyond implying it's the text to prepend. The description only partially compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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 specifies the action 'prepend text' to a note and clarifies the exact insertion point 'just after the title line'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like append_note and replace_note.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like append_note or replace_note. The description only describes behavior but does not provide usage context or exclusion criteria.

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