notebook_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation but does not disclose behavior like result limits beyond max_results, pagination, or authentication needs. It 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.

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

The description is extremely concise—one sentence and a parameter definition. No wasted words, and the purpose is front-loaded. It earns its place.

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?

While an output schema exists (reducing the need to describe returns), the description lacks details on scoping (e.g., all notebooks vs. user-accessible), ordering, or the possibility of empty results. It is sufficient but not comprehensive.

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 0% coverage, but the description explains 'max_results: Maximum number of notebooks to return (default: 100)', adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List all notebooks' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like notebook_create, notebook_delete, and notebook_query. It is unambiguous about 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as notebook_query (filtered list) or notebook_get (single notebook). The description provides no context about appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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