read_notes_batch

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 adds the behavioral detail 'Returns missing paths separately,' which is useful. However, it does not disclose other traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, or rate limits, which would enhance transparency.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences with no extraneous information. It front-loads the purpose and includes a key behavioral promise (missing paths). Every word earns its place.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately states the core functionality but lacks details on the response structure (e.g., format of returned notes and missing paths). This leaves the agent partially uninformed about the output.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the four parameters. The usage hint 'for context building' is contextual, not parameter-specific.

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 states 'Read multiple notes in one call for context building,' which clearly indicates the tool's purpose as a batch read operation for gathering context. It distinguishes from single-note tools like get_note, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 when multiple notes are needed for context building, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_note for single note, list_notes for listing). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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