list_notebooks

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

Without annotations, the description carries the Full burden. It transparently states the action (list all) and the exact output fields, making the behavior clear for a simple read-only operation. There are no side effects or hidden behaviors implied, though it does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with zero wasted words. Every element adds value.

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?

For a parameterless list tool with a low complexity, the description fully covers what the tool does and the data it returns. The presence of an output schema handles detailed return structure, so no further information is required.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 as per the guidelines. The description adds semantic meaning by specifying the return fields (id, title, parent_id), which is sensible for a parameterless list operation.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'all Joplin notebooks (folders)' and explicitly mentions the fields returned (id, title, parent_id). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_notebook, delete_notebook, and list_notes.

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 clear context that this tool returns all notebooks in the system, which implicitly indicates it is the correct choice for reading the full notebook list. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous given the sibling tool names.

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