list_saved_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that notes are 'cached' (potential staleness) and explains sorting/filters, but does not state side effects (e.g., read-only implication) or any limitations beyond caching. It adds useful context but lacks explicit safety or behavioral notes.

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 compact, two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes necessary filter details without redundancy. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description needn't explain return values. It covers pagination, filters, sorting, and the 'cached' nuance, which is sufficient for a list tool. However, it could mention author filtering behavior or note that results are limited to user's saved notes, though not essential.

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 0%, but the description explains two non-obvious parameters (sort_by and restacks_only) with examples. It omits limit, author, and offset, which are intuitive but still deserve mention. The partial coverage does not fully compensate for the zero schema coverage.

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 'List cached saved notes' with specific filters and pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like search_saved_notes (search vs list) and sync_saved_notes (sync vs list) by naming the core action and resource.

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 description implies usage for listing saved notes and mentions filters but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use search_saved_notes instead). There is no explicit 'use this when' or 'don't use when' guidance, though the functionality is evident.

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