Read Note With Context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the list of returned components but does not disclose behavior for edge cases like missing files or the need to provide at least one parameter. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that clearly states the action and its scope with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

The output schema is present and the annotations provide strong safety context, so the description is not required to explain return values or safety. The main gap is the lack of clarity on whether at least one of file/path must be provided and how they interact, but the overall tool is simple and well-covered by structured metadata.

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?

The schema descriptions for both parameters (file and path) are complete and self-explanatory, providing 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameters, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool reads a note and specifies the additional components returned (metadata, outline, properties, outgoing links, backlinks). It is distinct from sibling create/update tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from search_notes or vault_overview.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. It is implied that this tool is for reading a single note's full context, but there is no mention of when to prefer it over search_notes or how to choose between the file and path parameters.

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