list_notebooks

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

The description states it 'retrieves and displays' notebooks and specifies the return format as a formatted string. However, with no annotations provided, it fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation (which is implied but not explicit).

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 two sentences and a return type specification. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, but the return type could be integrated more smoothly. Overall, it is efficient and clear.

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 no parameters and a simple string output, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality. However, it lacks any mention of limitations, edge cases, or pagination, which would be expected for a 'list all' operation.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Per guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate since no additional parameter information is needed.

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 action ('list') and the resource ('all notebooks/folders'). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'create_notebook' or 'find_notes_in_notebook', which serve different purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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