create_notebook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the permission requirements for both root and nested creation ('requires a `$root` write entry in config, or blanket write access' and 'requires write access to that notebook'). This is valuable behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it doesn't mention what happens on success (e.g., return value) or potential side effects, but the output schema exists, which mitigates the need to explain return values.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. It efficiently covers usage, permissions, and alternative tool 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 moderate complexity (2 params, one optional), the description covers the key decision (root vs. nested) and permission requirements. The output schema exists, so return values are covered. It could mention error cases or prerequisites, but the description is largely complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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 compensate. It explains the semantics of parent_id in detail (root vs. nested, permission implications) and implicitly explains title as the notebook's name. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't describe title's format 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Create a new notebook.' It specifies the two modes of operation (root vs. nested) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_note and list_notebooks by focusing on notebook creation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use each parameter: omit parent_id for root creation, set it for nesting. It also names the alternative tool (list_notebooks) for finding a parent_id, which helps the agent decide when to use this tool versus others.

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