get_notebook

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to state safety. It adds that the tool returns 'saved records', giving a bit more detail about the output, but doesn't disclose potential limitations like pagination or size constraints. This is minor added value beyond annotations.

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 directly communicates the action and object. It contains no unnecessary words and is perfectly concise.

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 simple getter with one parameter, read-only annotations, and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It clarifies that saved records are included, which is a key detail. Minor gaps like pagination are not critical given the output schema exists.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a description for notebook_id, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter, such as format or how to obtain it. Baseline 3 applies.

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 'Read a notebook and its saved records' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a read operation on a notebook. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_notebook, delete_notebook, and list_notebooks, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the description and the parameter schema: you need a notebook_id to read a specific notebook. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like list_notebooks or get_book_spine, and no mention of when not to use it.

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