list-onenote-sections

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description only needs to add non-schema behavior. It adds the default sort order and automatic pagination, both useful and not present in annotations. The phrase 'list all' slightly overstates the default maxItems cap, but the schema documents that cap clearly.

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?

One front-loaded sentence communicates scope and two key behavioral facts. There is no filler, repetition of schema details, or redundant explanation of the tool name.

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 read-only, no-required-param listing tool, this is nearly complete: scope, ordering, and pagination are covered, and the schema handles parameter details. It lacks an explicit pointer to notebook-scoped alternatives, but sibling names make that route discoverable.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents cursor, filter, orderby, and maxItems. The description adds no parameter-level detail, though its pagination note supports the cursor/maxItems semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and scope: 'List all OneNote sections across the user's notebooks,' which clearly distinguishes it from notebook-scoped siblings like list-onenote-notebook-sections and site-scoped variants. The parenthetical 'newest-modified first' adds useful behavior without obscuring the core purpose.

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 clearly states the tool covers all of the user's notebooks, implying use for a global, flat enumeration rather than a notebook- or section-group-scoped listing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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