notebook_refresh

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'force refreshes' and 'detects' changes, but it does not explain the operational consequences: whether it writes to the notebook, requires permissions, is destructive, or has side effects. The term 'force' implies a non-trivial behavior that is left unspecified.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Force refresh') and packs the change-detection behavior into a concise clause. There is no wasted or redundant wording.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should provide more context about the operation's inputs, outputs, and side effects. It does not explain terms like 'live notebooks' or 'sources', what happens when notebook_id is omitted, or what the return value looks like. This leaves a meaningful gap for a one-parameter tool.

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 schema has one parameter (notebook_id) with zero description coverage, and the tool description does not mention it at all. The description provides no meaning for what notebook_id should be or how it affects the refresh (e.g., filtering to a specific notebook vs. all notebooks).

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 the specific verb 'Force refresh' and identifies the resources ('live notebooks and sources') plus the action's scope (detecting created, renamed, deleted, newly added items). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like compare_notebooks or doctor.

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 implicitly suggests this tool is for refreshing live notebooks and sources, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives, mention prerequisites, or provide exclusions. There is no reference to sibling tools or conditions for use.

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