onenote_template_preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'without modifying OneNote.' It also adds the qualifier 'trusted' and enumerates available templates, providing context beyond the annotations. It does not explain behavior for the date parameter, but that is a minor gap given 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The core action is stated immediately, followed by the template list. 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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no output schema), and the description covers its main purpose and template options. However, it omits the role of 'title' and 'date' in the preview and what the preview output looks like. Given no output schema, the description should be more explicit about the return behavior to be fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It lists the enum values for 'template,' which is helpful, but 'title' and 'date' are left unexplained. 'Title' is fairly self-explanatory, but 'date' could mean the meeting date, creation date, or something else, and no syntax/format is provided. The description compensates for only a third of the parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Preview') with a clear resource ('trusted page template') and explicitly states the non-mutating behavior ('without modifying OneNote'). It also lists the available templates, distinguishing it from sibling creation tools like onenote_create_from_template.

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 phrase 'without modifying OneNote' clearly signals this is for read-only previewing, which distinguishes it from create/edit tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state 'use this when you only need to see the template,' so it falls short of explicit when/when-not guidance.

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