Read notes

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

The description discloses that the tool marks notes as read, which is a behavioral side effect beyond typical read operations. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not cover permissions, rate limits, or other side effects. The disclosure is useful but incomplete.

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 sentence with no redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded, but could benefit from including parameter context or usage guidance without sacrificing brevity.

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?

The description is minimal and does not explain return values (though an output schema exists), error conditions, or authorization requirements. It does not help the agent differentiate from siblings beyond the basic purpose.

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 description implies the purpose of the 'forSession' parameter by stating notes are directed to a session or broadcast. However, the 'unreadOnly' parameter is not mentioned. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description only partially compensates for missing parameter documentation.

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 tool reads notes directed to a session or broadcast and marks them as read. The verb 'Lee' (reads) and the specification of 'notas dirigidas a una sesión (o broadcast)' make the purpose distinct from sibling tools like leave_note (which writes) and activity_log (which logs events).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions for use, prerequisites, or when other tools (e.g., leave_note, who_is_here) are more appropriate.

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