read_notebook

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds behavioral context: pagination via start_index and limit, response content differences between brief and detailed. No contradictions. Could mention if the tool is safe to call repeatedly, but overall good.

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?

Description is three paragraphs, each serving a purpose: what it does, usage per format, and recommended workflow. Could be slightly tighter but no wasted sentences. Front-loaded with core function.

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 tool with 4 parameters and output schema (not shown but exists), description covers all key aspects: pagination, format details, and best practices. Sufficient for agent to invoke correctly without ambiguity.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining that brief returns first line and line count, detailed returns full source, and gives usage advice for combining both. This augments the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states it reads a notebook and returns per-cell details (index, source, type, execution count). It distinguishes between brief and detailed formats. Siblings like list_notebooks or restart_notebook are distinct operations.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: brief for overview, detailed for debugging, and recommends using brief first then detailed for specific cells. This helps the agent choose the correct format and limit settings.

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