tag

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 explains the actions but does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The behavior is straightforward but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise with three lines and a well-structured bullet list. Every sentence provides clear information 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 has 5 parameters (1 required), an output schema, and handles multiple actions, the description covers the overall functionality adequately. It could mention the output format briefly but is not necessary due to the output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds value by explaining the purpose of each action and how parameters are used (e.g., 'query' for select). It goes beyond the schema by summarizing the workflow.

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 tool manages notebook tags and selection by tag matching. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'label', 'note', and 'notebook_*' tools by specifying tag-specific actions.

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?

While the description lists actions, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'label' or 'notebook_query'. The context of tag management is implied but not contrasted with other tools.

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