list_email_notes

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It discloses that notes are visible only to agents, but does not explain what the optional parameters do (e.g., are they filters or outputs?), the return format, or any access restrictions. The trailing '[query]' is unexplained and may confuse.

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 brief but contains redundancy: 'Listar notas internas de un hilo de email' and 'Obtiene las notas internas de un hilo de email' say the same thing. The '[query]' suffix appears to be a leftover and adds no value. It could be more concise and remove clutter.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and the presence of five parameters, the description lacks completeness. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of note objects with which fields), how optional parameters affect the output, or any pagination. For a data retrieval tool, this is insufficient.

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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters—it merely states the tool lists notes. The schema descriptions are minimal, but the description does not compensate or clarify parameter usage.

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 lists internal notes of an email thread and distinguishes notes as visible only to agents. The verb 'listar' and resource 'notas internas de un hilo de email' are specific. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools, the context of notes vs threads or other entities is clear.

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 like add_email_note or delete_email_note. The description does not mention prerequisites, complementary tools, or conditions for use.

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