list_notebooks

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.