get_notebook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and returns, without mentioning permissions, side effects, or error handling (e.g., what happens if notebook_id does not exist).

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses a standard docstring format with Args and Returns sections. However, the Returns section is minimal ('Notebook details') and could be more descriptive.

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 that there is only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is adequate but not thorough. It lacks details on error behavior, required permissions, and the structure of the return value beyond what the output schema might provide.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the parameter documentation in the schema provides only name and type. The description adds a helpful example format ('notebook:abc123') for notebook_id, which adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get a specific notebook by ID.' The verb 'get' and the resource 'notebook by ID' are specific and distinguish it from sibling tools like get_note or get_model.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search or list_notebooks. Among many sibling get tools, explicit context on when to choose this one is missing.

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