notebooklm-mcp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it resets chat history while keeping the session ID, implies a destructive action (reset), and includes a user-interaction requirement (ask before resetting). However, it doesn't mention potential side effects like loss of unsaved data or error conditions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every phrase adds value: the first defines the tool, the second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, efficiently structured.

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 moderate complexity (destructive reset with one parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and key behavior, but lacks details on return values or error handling, which would be helpful for full completeness.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'session_id' parameter. The description doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 specific action ('reset a session's chat history') and resource ('session'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'close_session' or 'list_sessions'. It precisely conveys the verb and target without being tautological.

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 explicitly states when to use ('for a clean slate when the task changes') and includes a critical behavioral directive ('ask the user before resetting'), providing clear context and exclusions compared to alternatives.

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