NotebookLM MCP

Rename notebook

notebook_rename

Idempotent

Renames a notebook by changing its title while keeping its sources and chat intact; use notebook_list first to find the notebook_id.

Instructions

Change a notebook's title; its sources and chat stay as they are. Returns a confirmation message with the new title. Find the notebook_id with notebook_list first.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`new_title`	Yes	New title for the notebook
`notebook_id`	Yes	Notebook ID, as returned by notebook_list or notebook_create

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`message`	No	Human-readable outcome or next step

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0Oct 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable outcome or next step",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "const": "success",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0Oct 20, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / notebook_id / description

Previous value: -"The notebook ID"New value: +"Notebook ID, as returned by notebook_list or notebook_create"

First observedv0.3.1Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false. The description adds real value beyond that by specifying the mutation scope (sources and chat are untouched) and the return shape (a confirmation message with the new title). It does not cover permissions or failure modes, keeping it short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each earning its place, with the mutation and its non-effects front-loaded and the prerequisite last. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be elaborated, yet the description still summarizes the confirmation message. For a two-param idempotent rename, everything an agent needs is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both params are fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of notebook_id/notebook_list marginally reinforces this but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Change a notebook's title') and immediately scopes what is NOT affected ('its sources and chat stay as they are'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like notebook_create, notebook_delete, or source_* tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides a concrete prerequisite: 'Find the notebook_id with notebook_list first.' Clear context for invocation, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative-selection guidance (e.g., when to rename vs. create).

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