notebook_packages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by naming the fields returned, which partially compensates for the absent output schema, but it says nothing about scope (which kernel/environment it reflects) or whether results are cached/live.

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 compact, front-loaded fragment with no filler; the resource comes first and the returned fields follow. It is appropriately sized, though a fragment rather than a full sentence limits it slightly.

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 zero-param, read-only tool with no output schema, listing the return fields is the main thing an agent needs, and the description supplies it. Minor gaps remain around which environment/kernel is being reported and any pagination or size limits.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is no parameter meaning to clarify and the description correctly does not invent any.

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?

States a specific resource (packages installed in the notebook Python environment) and enumerates the returned fields (name, version, summary, core). The implicit 'list' verb and the word 'installed' distinguish it from the sibling notebook_packages_install, though the naming contrast is not stated explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives. With siblings like notebook_packages_install and notebook_environment present, the description should say when to call this versus those, and it does not.

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