karea_edit_note

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It only states 'edit an existing note', implying mutation, but does not explain whether content is replaced, appended, or if the operation is idempotent. No details on authorization or side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no extraneous information. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise, though could be slightly expanded to include minimal usage context without harming conciseness.

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 and comprehensive schema descriptions, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any usage guidance or behavioral notes, leaving gaps for an agent to correctly invoke it in 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter is well-documented in the schema (e.g., 'Note UUID (from karea_list_notes)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter insight beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 'Edit an existing note on a task' uses a specific verb ('Edit') and a concrete resource ('note on a task'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like karea_add_note (create), karea_delete_note (delete), and karea_list_notes (list).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., karea_add_note or karea_delete_note). The description does not specify prerequisites (e.g., note must exist) or when not to use it.

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