fabric_update_notebook_definition

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

The description mentions 'long-running,' which is a behavioral trait not captured in empty annotations. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is destructive (replace implies overwrite), required permissions, or error states. With no annotations, more context would help.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence plus a brief note. Every word is purposeful, front-loading the key action and a critical behavioral note.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and empty annotations. The description lacks details about return value, execution model (async?), how to monitor the long-running operation, and edge cases. It is insufficiently complete for an agent to use safely without additional context.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal value. It reiterates the optional default lakehouse but does not explain what 'long-running' means for parameter behavior or output.

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 the tool replaces a notebook's cells, using specific verb 'Replace' and resource 'notebook's cells'. It distinguishes from siblings like fabric_create_notebook (create new) and fabric_get_notebook (read). The 'long-running' note further clarifies behavior.

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 updating an existing notebook's cells but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like fabric_create_notebook or fabric_run_notebook. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are provided.

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