Create appointment note

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description doesn't contradict them. It adds minimal behavioral context (mutates an appointment) beyond the basic operation, but doesn't discuss side effects, permissions, or error conditions. With annotations present, this is adequate but not enriching.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the purpose and an example, earning its place without redundancy.

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 3 parameters and annotations covering mutation, the description is mostly complete. It lacks explicit differentiation from ghl_create_contact_note and doesn't describe the appointmentId parameter, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 covers 'body' and 'userId' but not 'appointmentId'. The description doesn't clarify parameters beyond the schema; 'appointmentId' is implied by 'calendar appointment' but not explicitly described. With 67% schema coverage, the description should compensate, but it doesn't add value for the missing parameter.

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 a clear verb ('Add') and resource ('a note to a calendar appointment'), with an example ('outcome of a shoot/call'). It is distinct from the sibling ghl_create_contact_note because it scopes to appointments, not contacts.

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 the appropriate use case (adding notes to appointments) and gives a concrete scenario. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like contact notes, but the specificity makes the intended use clear. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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