notebook_update

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that only name and description are modified, which is helpful scoping, but it does not disclose other behavioral details such as whether a workspace relationship is required or any side effects beyond the update.

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 one short sentence with no filler. The verb and object are front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple metadata update with full schema descriptions and annotations covering mutability. The definition is sufficient for an agent to identify and invoke it, though it could be stronger with one sentence steering away from notebook_update_definition.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents workspaceId, notebookId, displayName, and description. The description restates the two mutable fields in natural language but adds little beyond the schema, except optionally mapping 'name' to displayName.

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 a specific verb ('Update'), a specific resource ('a notebook'), and the exact mutable fields ('name or description'). This makes it easy to distinguish from related siblings like notebook_update_definition, which targets notebook content rather than metadata.

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 implies the intended use — changing a notebook's name or description — but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over notebook_update_definition or other notebook operations. There are no exclusions or alternative routing instructions.

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