create-note

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the HTTP method and required scope (sales:write), which is useful, but it does not explain side effects, response behavior, or whether pinning/associating entities changes anything.

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 front-loads the action, resource, endpoint, and required scope. There is no filler or duplication of schema details.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It omits how parameters relate to each other, whether associations are required, and what the caller should expect after creation.

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 only 20%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It does not provide any additional meaning for dealId, pinned, personId, or organizationId, leaving relationships and constraints unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a sales note', and reinforces it with the exact POST endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get-note, update-note, and delete-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 choose this tool over alternatives such as create-todo or create-activity. The endpoint and scope are stated, but there is no context about prerequisites, relationship to deals/people/organizations, or when list-notes/get-note should be used instead.

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