Get Cell Map

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses a genuinely non-obvious behavior: a preview does not record the edit_cell read baseline and only updates this tool's own change-detection snapshot. That is valuable. It still omits other behavioral context such as how the snapshot interacts across sessions or whether the map is cached, so it falls just short of full coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return contents in two short sentences, followed by one earned cautionary paragraph about the edit baseline. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return format need not be explained, yet the description still summarizes it. Combined with the preview/edit-baseline caveat and clear routing to get_cell_data, an agent has everything needed to call this safely.

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 server_url, session_id, and preview_lines are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra semantics about these parameters (e.g., preview_lines tradeoffs), so the 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 names a specific verb+resource (get a map of cells) and states exactly what it returns: cell IDs, names, code previews, and runtime state. It also positions itself against the sibling get_cell_data by calling itself the 'starting point for navigating a notebook' and contrasting previews with full source.

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?

It states when to use it ('starting point for navigating a notebook') and names the alternative with a condition: read full source with get_cell_data before editing. The agent does not need to infer the routing decision.

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