list_notes

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully explains pagination (limit/offset), the soft-delete toggle (include_deleted default False), and the shape of returned data, and 'List' implies read-only. It says nothing about authorization requirements, rate limits, or result ordering, so it is helpful but not complete for a zero-annotation tool.

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?

Front-loaded one-line summary followed by a compact per-parameter block. It repeats default values already encoded in the schema, which is minor redundancy, but nothing is buried or verbose.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no further explanation, and the description correctly stays focused on filters, pagination, and soft-delete behavior. The only real gap is routing guidance against sibling tools, which the other dimensions already flag.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: all five parameters get meaning, defaults are stated, and theme gains an explicit enum list (Yellow, Green, Pink, Purple, Blue, Grey, Charcoal) absent from the schema. The is_open gloss ('on desktop') is slightly vague but the other four are well specified.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Microsoft Sticky Notes) and even previews the returned fields (summary metadata, theme, text preview). It does not, however, explicitly disambiguate itself from search_notes or get_note, which an agent must infer from the verb alone.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing is provided. The presence of search_notes as a sibling makes the omission notable, since the agent gets no signal on when to filter via search_notes instead of enumerating here.

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