quick_note

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions 'timestamped' but provides no details on mutability, persistence, or error handling. For a simple create tool, this is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 front-loaded action verb; every word earns its place. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required params, no output schema), the description covers purpose and usage clearly. However, it omits details like persistence or if notes are appended to existing notes, but these are minor gaps.

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%, so the schema already describes both parameters adequately. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'into a project,' which echoes the project param. The timestamp mention is behavioral, not param-specific.

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 uses 'Drop a timestamped note into a project' which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'session_log' by specifying notes are for stray thoughts, not fitting a session log.

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 states 'For stray thoughts that don't fit a session log,' providing clear when-to-use and a direct alternative (session_log). This covers both affirmative and exclusionary guidance.

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