get-notebooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'List...' and defines notebooks as collaborative documents. It fails to mention pagination (start, count), sorting effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The agent gets minimal behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence immediately states the primary action. The second sentence provides context. Every word 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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain pagination, sorting, filtering, or the structure of the response. A more detailed description is warranted given the tool's complexity.

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?

All 10 parameters have descriptions in the input schema, providing full coverage. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'List Datadog notebooks' and provides example use cases like 'show investigation notebooks'. It is specific and actionable, but does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_notebooks' which would perform a similar function.

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 includes example queries when to use ('show investigation notebooks', 'find notebooks by team', 'recent notebooks about outage'), but does not explicitly contrast with the sibling 'list_notebooks' or other listing tools. Guidance is present but lacks exclusionary information.

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