Update an encrypted note

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

Beyond destructiveHint=true it explains what destruction looks like ('replace makes the note exactly the given markdown'), discloses that edits merge live with concurrent typers (explaining non-idempotency in practice), that encryption happens on this computer, and that edit access plus Pro are required. That is substantive context annotations cannot carry.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then mode semantics, then concurrency and prerequisites. No sentence is 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?

Covers what an agent needs to call it safely: auth prerequisites, client-side encryption, destructive replace semantics, and live-merge concurrency. It does not say what happens on a concurrent conflict or what the call returns, though there is no output schema to lean on.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds detail the schema lacks: 'append' places text on a new line at the end, and 'replace' means the result is exactly the given markdown. It says nothing extra about key or note.

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?

States a specific verb (changes the markdown) and a specific resource (an end-to-end encrypted static.md note), plus where the encryption happens. It is unmistakably distinct from read_encrypted_note and create_encrypted_note.

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 two modes are spelled out with their effect on the note ('append' adds a new line at the end, 'replace' makes the note exactly the given markdown), and 'Needs edit access and Pro' gives an explicit precondition. It never names a sibling tool as an alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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