Append to daily 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 this is an append operation creating a timestamped entry (implying non-destructive addition), but it does not explain whether a missing daily note is created, whether the operation is idempotent, what permissions are required, or what the response looks like.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with zero waste. The key scoping information (today's daily note or a given date) is front-loaded, and the usage context follows efficiently.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, default date behavior, and entry format. The main gap is not stating whether the note is created if absent, which is a meaningful behavioral detail for an append tool.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented with types and defaults. The description restates the date parameter's default and adds that entries are timestamped and one bullet, but does not add substantial meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb ('Append') and resource ('today's daily note'), with scope for a given date. It is clear enough to distinguish from general note tools like write_note and edit_note by virtue of targeting the daily note, though it does not explicitly name those 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?

It gives clear context for when to use the tool: 'The right place for observations, decisions, and things to remember.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use remember or write_note instead), so it falls short of a 5.

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