Collection Edit

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

The description plainly states that the operation mutates the collection's name and/or notebook list, which is useful given no annotations exist. However, it does not disclose auth requirements, whether the notebook list is replaced wholesale, or whether edits are reversible; the replacement semantics only appear in the schema's 'New complete list' wording.

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?

A single, tightly worded sentence contains the essential purpose with no filler, redundant details, or repetition of the tool name. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with fully documented parameters and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could be fuller with an explicit note about full-list replacement or a pointer to collection_set_emoji, but the schema and sibling names mitigate those gaps.

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 100%, and each parameter already has a clear description. The tool description adds no new parameter meaning beyond confirming that name and notebook_ids are the editable fields, so the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 names a specific action ('Edit'), a specific resource ('an existing collection'), and the exact fields affected ('name and/or list of notebooks'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from collection_create, collection_delete, and collection_set_emoji.

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 it: when an existing collection's name or notebook membership must be changed. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternatives, such as using collection_create for new collections or collection_delete for removal.

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