export_notesReturn all notes, or only those with a selected tag, as one Markdown document sorted newest first; the operation is read-only and writes nothing to disk.
Return all notes (or only those with one tag) as one Markdown document, newest first. Read-only: nothing is written to disk.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag | No | Only export notes with this tag |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and a closed world, and the description usefully adds that output is a single concatenated Markdown document ordered newest first and that nothing is written to disk. It does not mention size limits, pagination or what happens with very large note sets.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the return shape and ordering, with no filler or repetition.
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 correctly fills the gap by describing the return value and ordering, and the safety profile is covered by annotations. Only edge-case behavior (large exports, empty results, tag misses) is unaddressed.
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% and the single tag parameter is documented there; the description only echoes that omitting it means all notes are exported. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter detail.
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 and resource (return all notes), the output form (one Markdown document) and the ordering (newest first), which separates it from list_notes/search_notes that return structured results. It never names a sibling, so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.
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 parenthetical 'or only those with one tag' implies when to pass the tag filter, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus list_notes/search_notes/get_note guidance and no stated exclusions or limits.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.