get_notebooks

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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond them: parent_id/parent_type semantics, updated_at edit behavior, parent_missing/parent_done flags, and an explicit cost model (2 calls, plus one per distinct parent missing). The call-cost disclosure is particularly valuable for planning.

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 purpose, and every sentence carries information (parent semantics, updated_at, text routing, missing/done flags, cost). It is dense and the trailing cost sentence is complex to parse, which keeps it from a 5, but there is 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 values need not be explained, yet the description still covers the output-relevant semantics (parent fields, flags, updated_at). For a zero-param, read-only list tool this is complete for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no arguments to document and the description correctly spends its text on output semantics instead.

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 ('List all notebooks') plus the exact scope ('with page titles, order and sections, without text'). It explicitly routes the agent away from itself for a related need ('For text: get_notebook'), so it is distinguishable from siblings get_notebook and search_notebooks.

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?

Clear context for when to use it (overview listing without page text) and names the alternative for full text (get_notebook). It does not address when to prefer search_notebooks over a full list, so no explicit exclusion is given, keeping it below a 5.

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