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 says 'List Datadog notebooks' and adds context about notebooks being collaborative documents. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, any pagination behavior (despite start/count parameters), or other side effects. This is insufficient for a list tool.

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 three sentences long, each serving a distinct purpose: action, usage examples, and context. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource. No redundant words. Excellent conciseness.

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?

Given the tool has 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not describe the return format or mention pagination behavior. While the examples help, more details about the response structure or filtering behavior would improve completeness for an agent.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides. It does not explain how parameters like 'query' or 'sortField' affect results, but the schema descriptions are adequate, so a 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 queries ('show investigation notebooks', 'find notebooks by team'), making the purpose specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'list_notebooks', which likely has similar functionality, so it loses a point.

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 explicitly says 'Use for 'show investigation notebooks', 'find notebooks by team', or 'recent notebooks about outage'', giving clear usage contexts. It does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives, but the examples are sufficient for typical use.

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