Freelo Get Note

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

Annotations already establish read-only, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context about the response contents and the document nature of notes. There is no contradiction with the annotations, and the added detail about what is fetched goes beyond the structured metadata.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary action and resource are front-loaded, and the clarifying context about notes being standalone documents is concise and meaningful.

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 read-by-ID tool with one parameter, an output schema, and safety annotations, this description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns and what notes are in this system, which is enough to select and invoke it correctly. It does not cover edge cases like missing IDs, but that is adequately handled by the schema and output schema context.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage of the single parameter, including a concrete example and a hint for where to obtain the value. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb ('Fetches'), a specific resource ('a specific note by ID'), and the expected payload ('title, content, and metadata'). The phrase 'Notes are standalone documents for project documentation' distinguishes this from task-related siblings like freelo_get_task_details and freelo_get_task_description.

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 implies when to use this tool by clarifying that notes are standalone documentation documents, which separates them from tasks, projects, and comments. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, so the usage guidance remains implicit rather than direct.

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