update_notebook_record

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

The description adds a useful warning: 'Changes stored DeepTutor learning data.' This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) by emphasizing persistence and learner authorization. It does not contradict the 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 compact and front-loads the critical warning. The structure is slightly awkward—the purpose sentence comes last—but every sentence carries useful safety or operational content.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the input schema covers all parameters, the description is largely complete. It addresses the key risk (user authorization) and mutation of stored data, leaving no major missing context for a safe call.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds only generic guidance to 'check the target ID and values' and reinforces that confirm should only be true when authorized, but it does not add detailed parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific action and resource: 'Edit a saved notebook record.' This clearly identifies an update operation and distinguishes it from sibling add/delete operations, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 gives clear usage context: 'call only when the learner explicitly requests this action' and instructs the agent to check the target ID and values. It does not name specific sibling alternatives, but the condition for when to call is explicit and exclusionary.

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