Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• create_sectionB
  3.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, error conditions, or whether duplicate names are allowed, leaving the agent without important context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple create operation with two documented parameters, the description is adequate but lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., notebook existence) and potential error responses. No output schema exists, so return values are not covered, but the description still leaves gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema fully documents both notebook_id and display_name with descriptions, so the description adds no extra semantic value. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses the specific verb 'Create' and resource 'section in a OneNote notebook', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_sections and create_page.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a notebook must be created first or how it differs from create_page. The description only states what it does without contextual usage.

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

• create_pageA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description bears the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: script tags and event handlers are stripped for security. However, it doesn't mention permissions, side effects, or return value, leaving some gaps.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word earns its place. No filler or repetition of schema details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple create tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter expectations, and a security note. It's slightly incomplete regarding usage guidance relative to siblings and return behavior, but adequate.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  All parameters are already described in the schema (100% coverage), but the description adds value by clarifying that html_content should be HTML and that security filtering applies. This enriches the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states a specific action ('Create a new page') and resource ('OneNote section'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create_section and update_page. The verb and object are unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The context of when to use the tool is clear: when a new page needs to be created in an existing OneNote section. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list itself makes the distinction apparent.

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

• list_notebooksA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns notebook IDs, names, share status, and direct links, and notes it operates within the scope of the configured service account. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'list' inherently implies no side effects, which is sufficient for this simple read tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the primary function followed by return details. Every word serves a purpose—no filler, no repetition of the name or title, and all information is presented in a logical order.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool with low complexity, this description is largely complete—it names the resource scope and return data. It lacks explicit mention of pagination or ordering, but these are not critical for a list operation and are not expected given the simplicity of the tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has zero parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is no schema detail to compensate for, and the description adds context about the return value instead.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all OneNote notebooks accessible to the configured service account,' which is specific and distinct from sibling tools that operate on sections and pages. The scope and return fields are also mentioned, fully clarifying what the tool does.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context of sibling tools (sections, pages) implies this is the entry point for notebook-level operations. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given, so usage guidance is only implied.

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

• list_sectionsA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It appropriately implies a read-only listing operation ('List all sections') and notes a dependency on notebook_id, but it does not describe return format, ordering, or possible errors. For a simple list tool, this is minimally adequate.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, each earning its place. The first states the action precisely, and the second provides a necessary usage guideline. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity (one param, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers its purpose and the required usage sequence. It lacks return format details, but the tool name and the obvious outcome ('list all sections') make it reasonably complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema already provides 100% coverage with a basic parameter description ('The ID of the OneNote notebook'). The tool description adds meaningful context by stating 'Use list_notebooks first to get the notebook ID,' clarifying the source of the parameter and the prerequisite step, which goes beyond the schema's type-only description.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states 'List all sections in a specific OneNote notebook' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling list_notebooks by specifying the notebook scope and directing the user to first call list_notebooks.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives explicit context: 'Use list_notebooks first to get the notebook ID.' This clearly indicates when this tool should be used (after obtaining a notebook ID). It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the prerequisite guidance is valuable.

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

• update_pageA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists supported operations (append, prepend, insert, replace, delete) and implies mutation, but it does not disclose potential side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or error handling. This is adequate but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise and well-structured: first sentence states primary purpose, second sentence summarizes supported operations, third sentence gives the key prerequisite. No filler or redundant information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a complex tool with patch commands, the description explicitly mentions the operation types and the prerequisite call to get_page. It does not explain return values or errors, but the absence of an output schema reduces that burden. The combination of schema and description provides sufficient context for correct usage.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema already covers all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds semantic value by explaining the use of element IDs for precise targeting, which clarifies the 'target' parameter and the workflow. This goes beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Update an existing OneNote page by applying patch commands.' It specifies the exact resource (OneNote page) and the action (update with patch commands), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_page and get_page.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides a concrete usage directive: 'Call get_page with include_ids=true first to obtain element IDs for precise targeting.' This guides the agent on a prerequisite step, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives beyond implying that get_page should be used before this tool.

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

• get_pageA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals the key behavioral detail that include_ids adds generated id attributes to elements, which is beyond the schema description. It also clarifies that the tool returns HTML content, though it doesn't mention error handling or non-mutating nature explicitly.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence delivers an actionable tip without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple get tool with just two parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it states the return type (HTML content) and the optional behavior. It doesn't explain handling of invalid IDs or large content, but those are not critical for basic usage. It's complete enough to successfully invoke the tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. However, the description adds value by elaborating on the include_ids parameter's purpose ('to get element IDs needed for targeted update_page commands'), which goes beyond the schema's simple 'adds generated id attributes'. This helps the agent understand when to use the parameter.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Get the HTML content of a OneNote page') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_page and list_sections by focusing on fetching content for a single page, not listing or modifying.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides practical guidance by explaining when to set include_ids=true: 'needed for targeted update_page commands'. This implies a use case for this tool in preparation for updates, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or alternative retrieval tools.

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