add_note

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

With no annotations, the description does carry the burden, but it does disclose that this is a write ("save") and that the response is the stored note including its id. It says nothing about duplicate titles, permission requirements, or whether an existing note is overwritten — gaps that matter for a mutation, even a simple one.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler and the operation front-loaded. Efficient, though the "return it with its id" clause partly restates what the output schema already covers.

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?

For a two-parameter create tool with a full schema and an output schema, the core purpose is covered and return values need not be spelled out. What's missing is the surrounding context an agent needs to choose this tool confidently — durability, uniqueness handling, or any prerequisite — leaving it minimally 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 description coverage is 100% — both title ("Short title.") and body ("Note text.") plus length bounds are documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Save a note" gives a specific verb and resource, and the second clause states what comes back (the note with its id). It is clear against the only sibling, search_notes (a read), though it never states the contrast explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this vs. search_notes or any other alternative, and no preconditions. The agent must infer that this is the write path for creating new notes.

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