list_saved_notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a genuinely non-obvious quirk: the default sort_by ('saved_at') yields no meaningful ordering for notes, and 'cached' signals results may be stale relative to the server. It omits any statement on auth requirements, cache staleness/sync behavior, or rate limits.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose before parameter nuance, with no filler. The saved_at parenthetical is slightly convoluted and could be tightened, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers purpose, filters, and sorting. It still leaves gaps on the cached/sync relationship, how it differs from search_saved_notes, and pagination defaults for a 5-parameter tool.

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 0% across 5 parameters, so the description must compensate and only partially does. It explains sort_by's two values and what restacks_only does, but limit, offset, and author are covered at best vaguely by 'pagination and optional author/restack filters' with no accepted format or author identifier semantics.

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 (List) and resource (cached saved notes) plus the supported filters, which separates it from the sibling search_saved_notes. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so an agent still has to infer list-vs-search, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'cached' hints that sync_saved_notes may be needed first and the list/search split is left to inference. The note that sort_by='saved_at' produces no meaningful order is a useful selection hint (prefer 'posted_at'), but no explicit when/when-not or alternative tool is named.

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