create_notebook

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description goes beyond them by disclosing that the tool relies on undocumented/experimental writes (/doc/create, /doc/update) and that the shape is pinned to app 1.71 — valuable fragility and reliability context an agent needs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the exclusion rule and then the experimental-writes caveat. It runs to three sentences but each carries distinct value; the technical note about undocumented endpoints earns its place.

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, return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. The description adds the exclusion logic and reliability caveat, leaving little an agent would need to call it correctly, though the positive use-case trigger could be sharper.

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 both parameters (title, sections) are already documented in the schema. The description only echoes 'optionally with sections' and adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a standalone notebook, optionally with sections') and explicitly scopes what it does not create. It distinguishes itself from create_category_or_project and the notebook-page tools without the reader needing to open a schema.

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?

Gives a clear when-not-to-use rule: project/category notebooks are not created here but come into being when a page is moved (update_notebook_page move_to_parent_id) or a second page is added. The alternative mechanism is named, though it doesn't spell out the positive trigger condition as crisply.

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