query_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the return format (compact rows with path+title by default, not note content), implies a read-only operation, and hints at optional extra fields via select. While it doesn't address error states or rate limits, this is sufficient for a query tool.

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 tightly written sentences: the first specifies the resource and scope, the second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the return structure (compact rows, path+title default, opt-in extras). Combined with detailed schema, the agent has enough context to use this tool correctly. Coverage is sufficient for a query tool with 11 parameters.

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 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The tool description adds context about default return fields and the 'select' parameter's ability to extend results, but does not significantly enhance individual parameter understanding beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 performs a structured metadata query on notes, listing specific filter dimensions (frontmatter, tag, folder, modified time, size). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'search' by noting it is for property-based filtering rather than text search.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool instead of 'search' when filtering by properties, providing clear context for when to invoke. This is a model example of usage guidance for an AI agent.

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