Create Section

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

With no annotations, the description itself must disclose behavioral expectations. It states the core mutation and the exclusive-parent rule, but it does not say what happens when both or neither ID is provided, whether special permissions are needed, or what the successful response contains.

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 front-loaded sentence plus one short operational constraint, with no redundant clauses. Every part of it contributes to correct selection or invocation.

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 low-complexity create operation with three self-documenting parameters, the description is nearly sufficient: it names the action, the parent choices, and the required exclusivity. The only notable omission is explicit return-value or error behavior, but that does not block an agent from invoking the tool correctly with the input 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 description coverage is 100%: name already documents the reserved characters and uniqueness requirement, and both parent IDs already document their exclusive relationship. The description repeats only the one-of rule and adds no new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score applies.

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 names the exact operation ('Creates a new section') and the allowed parents ('inside the given notebook or section group'), which is enough to tell it apart from sibling create tools such as create_notebook, create_section_group, and create_page. It clearly identifies the resource being produced.

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 second sentence gives a precise invocation constraint: exactly one of notebookId or sectionGroupId must be supplied. However, it never states when an agent should choose this tool over the sibling create tools, and it does not describe exclusions or prerequisites beyond the parent requirement.

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