onenote_create_section_group

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds value by disclosing that the tool returns a section_group_id and that it can be nested inside another section group, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and includes the key return value, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple create tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the operation, the accepted parent types, and the return value. Combined with annotations and schema, nothing critical is missing.

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 provides full descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant new parameter semantics beyond the schema; it only reinforces that parent_id can be a notebook or another section group, which the schema already states.

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 the tool creates a section group and specifies the location ('inside a notebook or another section group'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_section and create_notebook. The verb 'Create' and resource 'section group' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies when to use the tool by focusing on section group creation and the nesting options. It provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The sibling list reinforces the distinct purpose.

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