listNotebooksLists OneNote notebooks only. Use getOutline to also get sections in a single call.
List notebooks only. Prefer getOutline — it returns notebooks AND their sections in the same single call.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of items to return. Results are paginated internally. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope limitation 'only' (notebooks, not sections), which is useful context. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior beyond what the schema states, or other behavioral traits. This is a reasonable score given the annotations cover the key aspects.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose ('List notebooks only') and no filler. Every word contributes value, and the alternative recommendation is stated efficiently.
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?
This is a simple list tool with one optional parameter, a rich schema, and informative annotations. The description clearly conveys scope and usage context, and the schema already explains pagination. There is no missing information that would hinder an agent from using the tool correctly.
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 input schema has 100% coverage for its single 'limit' parameter, including a description of its behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 'notebooks', and the word 'only' explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like listSections and listPages. It also points to getOutline as an alternative, further clarifying purpose.
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 explicitly says 'Prefer getOutline' and gives a concrete reason ('returns notebooks AND their sections in the same single call'), which serves as clear when-not-to-use guidance. It tells the agent to prefer getOutline when both notebooks and sections are needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.