notes_search

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

Adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: mentions stable IDs for subsequent operations. Annotations already confirm readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction; description enhances understanding.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every piece of information is necessary and contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains the key return value (stable IDs) and the tool's role in a workflow. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning that matching notes are returned, but the parameter options (includeBodyHtml, includePlaintext) imply that content can be included. Overall adequate.

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 parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-level details beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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?

Clearly states the verb (Search), resource (Apple Notes), and scope (by title and plaintext body). Mentions return of stable IDs for follow-up tools, distinguishing it from siblings like notes_get or notes_list_accounts.

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 that returned IDs are for follow-up read, update, move, and delete tools, guiding when to use this tool. Does not explicitly name alternatives, but context is clear from sibling tool names.

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