notebooklm_get_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read-only action, but the description does not explain what metadata is returned, whether the operation can fail for missing resources, or any authentication or access considerations.

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, clear sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded, though it could have included a brief usage hint without becoming verbose.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and a generic phrase like 'metadata', the description is not complete enough for an agent to know what to expect. The tool is simple, but the description still leaves notable gaps around return content, edge cases, and differentiation from the query_metadata sibling.

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 input schema already provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for both id and type, and the enum defines the accepted resource types. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 states a clear verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('metadata for a notebook or source'), and the type enum in the schema reinforces the two target resources. It is not a tautology and is easily distinguished from set/validate metadata siblings, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from query_metadata.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus notebooklm_query_metadata, notebooklm_validate_metadata, or notebooklm_set_metadata. The description implies a simple read operation but leaves the choice between get and query metadata entirely to inference.

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