notebook_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' details, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't cover aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'sources' entails. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation support.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the main purpose stated concisely in the first sentence and parameter details in a structured 'Args' section. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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's low complexity (1 parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and incomplete behavioral context, it lacks depth for safe and effective use, especially compared to siblings with more detailed descriptions.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema by specifying that 'notebook_id' is a 'Notebook UUID', which clarifies the parameter's format and purpose. With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this adequately compensates, though it could provide more context on UUID format or examples.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'notebook details with sources', which specifies what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like notebook_list (which lists notebooks) and notebook_describe (which might provide different details), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate them.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like notebook_describe or notebook_query. It mentions retrieving details with sources, but doesn't specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions for usage.

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