onenote_list_notebooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add real value by enumerating which notebook sources are included (owned, shared, group team notebooks), which is behavioral context beyond the name, but it says nothing about read-only safety, result ordering, or size of the result set.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, front-loading the verb and resource and putting the scope enumeration immediately after. Nothing in it is redundant with the title or schema.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema that documents the return shape, the description is nearly complete. The only residual gaps are whether results are paged or ordered, which an agent may still need to know.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the schema fully covers the (empty) input and there is nothing further for the description to disambiguate.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('OneNote notebooks') and scopes the result set with a parenthetical covering owned, shared, and group team notebooks. This clearly separates it from siblings like onenote_list_sections and onenote_list_pages, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the entry point for browsing notebooks before drilling into sections or pages. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of when to prefer onenote_search_pages, and no prerequisites (e.g., sign-in or permissions) are stated.

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