get_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states the action without disclosing whether the summary is pre-generated or computed on-the-fly, if it requires prior generation, or any side effects. The existence of an output schema partially mitigates this, but the description still lacks critical behavior details.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. While front-loaded with the core action, it lacks depth, resulting in under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description could be sufficient if the schema fully documents the return. However, without parameter descriptions or annotations, and only one sentence of context, the tool is under-specified for an AI agent to invoke correctly, especially with numerous sibling tools.

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%, and the description adds no meaning for the notebook_id parameter beyond its type and requirement. It does not explain what the ID represents, how to obtain it, or any accepted formats, leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the 'AI-generated summary of the notebook', specifying both the verb ('Get') and the resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_history or get_source_text, which could cause confusion about which tool to use for related tasks.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ask_notebook or get_history. The description lacks context on prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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