manage-periodic-notes

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

No annotations are provided, placing the full burden on the description. The description omits critical behavioral details such as side effects of creation (e.g., creating missing notes by default), error conditions, or whether operations are idempotent. For a tool that can create notes, this is a significant gap.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the tool's core purpose. It contains no redundant words or unnecessary details, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, multiple actions, no output schema), the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, action-specific behavior (e.g., difference between 'daily' and 'list-daily'), or constraints like date formatting. The agent lacks sufficient information to use the tool correctly without relying heavily on external documentation.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, which already explain each field. No extra context like example values or formatting rules is provided.

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 performs 'getting, creating, and listing' operations on 'daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly periodic notes', providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like manage-notes (general notes) and manage-templates by focusing exclusively on periodic notes.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manage-notes or manage-templates. The description does not explain which action to choose for different scenarios or provide any exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from parameter names alone.

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