marm_notebook

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

Given no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: what each action does (save, activate, list, show active, clear). It doesn't mention side effects or permissions, but for a notebook tool the behavior is transparent enough.

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 extremely concise, using emojis and a bullet-list format to present each action in a single line. Every sentence serves a purpose, and relevant information is front-loaded.

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?

Without an output schema, the description explains what each action returns (e.g., 'show: list all saved entries with previews', 'status: show currently active entries'). It could be more complete by mentioning the format of returned data, but it's sufficient for a simple notebook 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate. It explains that 'name' and 'data' are needed for add, 'names' for use, but doesn't describe data types, constraints, or the session_name parameter. Basic meaning is added but not fully detailed.

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 it is a unified notebook tool with five distinct actions (add, use, show, status, clear), each with specific verbs. This differentiates it from sibling tools like marm_log_entry or marm_smart_recall, which serve different purposes.

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 explicit context for each action (e.g., 'add: save or update an entry', 'use: activate entries as instructions'). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the clear action breakdown implies appropriate usage scenarios.

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