create_notebook

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

The description explicitly states that this tool modifies stored DeepTutor learning data and includes a warning to check the target ID and values. The annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which do not specify safety, but the description compensates by highlighting the write operation. It also emphasizes user authorization, which is a behavioral trait beyond annotations. Credit for adding this context.

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 compact, with a prominent warning at the front. It's two sentences, with the warning leading the purpose. No redundant words. It earns a 4 because it's focused and front-loaded, though it could be more specific about the notebook's purpose.

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?

The description includes a safety warning about authorization, which is essential for a write operation. The output schema exists, so return values are covered. Parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description is concise and covers the key usage context. It misses a bit on defining what a notebook is, but overall sufficient.

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% description coverage for all 5 parameters, including descriptions for 'name', 'icon', 'color', 'confirm', and 'description'. The description adds value for the 'confirm' parameter by explaining it's for write authorization, which is crucial for the agent. Since the schema already covers parameter names, the extra context on 'confirm' is a bonus.

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 states 'Create a DeepTutor notebook' which identifies the verb and resource, but it's vague about what 'notebook' means in this context. It doesn't distinguish from similar tools like 'add_notebook_record' or 'delete_notebook' beyond the obvious. The function is a write operation, but without more context, an agent may not know exactly what creating a notebook entails.

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 includes a strong warning: 'call only when the learner explicitly requests this action', which provides clear usage guidance. However, it doesn't mention any alternatives or when not to use this tool (e.g., when updating an existing notebook, use update_notebook_record). The warning is useful but limited.

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