export_notebook

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful operational context by warning that output can be very large for notebooks with many paragraphs or large results.

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 short and front-loaded: purpose, warning, then the single argument. Every sentence adds useful information for invoking or interpreting the tool.

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 one-parameter read-only export tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the purpose, key warning, and parameter. Nothing essential for correct agent use 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It identifies the sole parameter as the notebook ID to export, but adds little beyond that label and does not explain ID format, source, or constraints.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: export a notebook as JSON, and names migration/backup as the purpose. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_notebook, clone_notebook, or import_notebook.

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 gives clear usage context: cross-server migration or backup. It does not state explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the intended use case is understandable.

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