create_notebook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., whether creation requires authentication, if it can overwrite, or any side effects). Simply states the action without further 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?

Very concise (two sentences) with front-loaded action. Every word is useful. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet for parameter), but overall excellent brevity.

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?

With an output schema present, the description is minimally adequate for a simple creation tool with one parameter. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral context, making it less complete compared to higher-scoring examples.

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 0%, so description compensates by explicitly stating 'name: The name of the new notebook.' This adds meaning beyond the schema's type string. However, it lacks constraints like uniqueness or length.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a new notebook in NotebookLM.' It identifies the specific verb (create) and resource (notebook) and distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_notebook, list_notebooks, etc.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention when to create a notebook vs. listing or deleting one. With siblings like add_source and ask_notebook, usage context is missing.

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