get_periodic_note

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the optional creation side effect (createIfMissing) and config file reads, giving good transparency. Could mention error handling for missing config, but overall adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. No redundancy; each sentence adds necessary context. Efficient and readable.

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?

Covers key behaviors and config dependencies. Lacks explicit description of return format (path and existence status) and what happens on missing config, but overall sufficient for a simple tool.

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 100%, but description adds value by explaining configuration source and the optional creation behavior for createIfMissing. This goes beyond schema details, earning a 4.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving path and existence status of a periodic note for a given date. It specifies the period types (daily, weekly, etc.) and distinguishes itself from siblings like append_periodic_note by focusing on retrieval and optional creation.

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?

Description provides context on configuration dependencies (daily-notes.json, periodic-notes plugin data.json) but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like create_note. Usage is implied rather than clearly guided.

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