Apple Create Note With Defaults

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

Annotations are sparse (no readOnly, no idempotent, no destructive hints). The description does disclose one useful behavioral trait: the tool will fall back to the configured default folder when folder_id is absent. But it doesn't disclose what happens if no default folder is configured, whether this operation is reversible, or what the created note object contains. With no output schema details in the description and an empty annotations set, there is room for more behavioral context.

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 wasted words. The most important behavior, default-folder fallback, is front-loaded in the first clause. Every word earns its place.

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 tool sits among many create/preview variants (apple_create_note_with_defaults, apple_preview_create_note_with_defaults, notes_create_note). The description clarifies only the default-folder aspect; it doesn't explain body format precedence, how tags are applied, or whether the preview variants should be used first. Given the rich sibling context and the 0% schema coverage, the definition could be more complete.

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 schema itself gives no parameter documentation. The description adds meaning only to folder_id, explaining that it can be omitted to use the default folder. It does not clarify the distinction between body_html and body_text (which is body preferred), the format of tags, or whether title is used as the note title. The description compensates for exactly one parameter and leaves the other four without semantic guidance.

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+resource ('Create a note') and adds a meaningful differentiator: it uses the configured default notes folder when folder_id is omitted. This distinguishes it from the sibling notes_create_note, suggesting this variant defaults the folder. However, it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternative, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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?

The description implies the usage condition: use this tool to create a note when you want the default folder, or when no folder_id is provided. It gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over notes_create_note, apple_preview_create_note_with_defaults, or apple_create_reminder_with_defaults. The 'when folder_id is omitted' phrasing is clear context but there are no when-not-to-use statements or named alternatives.

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