list_decks_and_notes

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It claims to exclude patterns but no parameters exist, creating ambiguity. No disclosure about potential large data volumes or performance implications.

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?

Very concise single sentence, but the phrase 'excluding specified patterns' adds confusion without corresponding parameters. It could be more accurate.

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 zero parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the basics. The only gap is the unclear 'excluding specified patterns' which is not supported by the schema.

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?

No parameters, but description introduces a misleading expectation of pattern exclusion. Schema coverage is trivial, and the description doesn't compensate for the missing parameter behavior.

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 retrieves all decks and note types with fields. It mentions 'excluding specified patterns' which is confusing given no parameters, but overall the purpose is specific and distinct from siblings like search_notes or fetch_due_cards_for_review.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist for searching or filtering, but the description doesn't help an AI agent decide.

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