add_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that content supports markdown and that it returns the newly created note with its ID, but it does not mention authorization requirements, potential errors, or side effects. This adds some transparency but is not exhaustive.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and clearly structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value; there is no filler or repetition of schema properties without added meaning.

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?

For a simple create operation with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameters, and return value adequately. It lacks explicit usage guidelines, but the low complexity and clear parameter documentation make it sufficiently complete 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: title (short descriptive), content (full body, supports markdown), and tags (optional list with an example). This goes well beyond the schema, providing essential semantic guidance.

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 'Create a new note in the knowledge base' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_task by specifying 'note' as the object, making the tool's purpose 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?

The description implies usage for creating new notes but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The purpose itself is clear, but no alternative guidance is given, such as 'use update_note for modifying existing notes.'

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