set_suspended

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions that card_ids are not note IDs, which is a useful behavioral note. However, it does not disclose side effects like whether suspended cards are hidden from reviews or any idempotency guarantees.

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 extremely concise: one sentence stating purpose, followed by a structured Args list. No wasted words.

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 simple tool with 2 parameters and an output schema (not needing return value explanation), the description adequately covers purpose and parameter semantics. Minor omission: no mention of idempotency or what happens after suspension.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining each parameter's role, including the critical clarification that card_ids refer to card IDs, not note IDs. This helps avoid misuse.

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 action (suspend or unsuspend) and the resource (one or more cards). It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform different actions like adding notes or fetching due cards.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It only implies usage through the action description.

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