list_notebooks

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

The description states 'Returns max 100 results by default' which contradicts the input schema's default value of 1000 for the limit parameter. This is a significant factual error. With no annotations, the description fails to accurately convey behavior.

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 sentence, efficient but contains a factual error (max 100 vs default 1000). It front-loads the action and search fields, but the error undermines conciseness.

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?

Given no output schema, 8 parameters, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the repository-related parameters (owner, name, branch) and force_refresh. It also does not describe the return format or pagination behavior beyond the misleading limit.

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 description explains three parameters (solution, name, path_contains) by mentioning them as search fields, adding meaning beyond the schema which lacks descriptions. However, it omits explanation for other parameters like limit (despite mentioning default max), force_refresh, repository_owner, repository_name, repository_branch.

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 clearly states 'List Microsoft Sentinel Jupyter notebooks' with specific search filters (solution, name, file path), distinguishing it from other list tools in the server. However, it could be slightly more specific about the resource context.

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 usage for searching notebooks by specified fields, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites or limitations beyond the default limit.

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