notes_create_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses supported body formats but doesn't explain what happens when no account or folder is specified, whether existing data is touched, whether the note body is required despite all parameters being optional, or what the result of creation looks like.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Both clauses earn their place: the primary action and the key format/title options. It is appropriately concise for the simplicity it conveys.

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 seven parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin to fully support correct invocation. It doesn't explain destination resolution when folder/account params are omitted, parameter precedence, requiredness of body, or return behavior, leaving significant ambiguity for an agent.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify body, title, and body_format by mentioning plain/HTML text, but it completely omits the four folder/account parameters (folder_id, account_id, folder_name, account_name), which are needed to control where the note is created. It also fails to clarify whether body is mandatory.

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 action ('Create a note in Apple Notes') and adds the key capability of plain text or HTML body with optional title. It is specific enough to identify the tool's purpose, though it doesn't explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like notes_update_note or notes_append_to_note.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the many siblings, such as notes_update_note, notes_append_to_note, or notes_move_note. The 'create' wording implies new-note usage, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternatives mentioned.

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