create_notebook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses multiple behavioral traits: never shows query data, always background creation, never switches active tab, user sees notification and opens it themselves. These go beyond the schema and give critical operational expectations.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds behavioral or usage detail. No redundancy or fluff.

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 single-parameter background action with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, user-facing behavior, and alternative invocation. It provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the label parameter fully documented ('Label shown on the new notebook tab (max 100 characters). Pass null to use the default.'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create a new QuestDB notebook tab in the editor.' It further clarifies scope by stating it 'only scaffolds the tab' and never shows query data, distinguishing it from data-returning tools. It also differentiates from sibling activate_notebook by explicitly mentioning it.

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?

Provides explicit usage conditions: the tab is always created in the background, and 'only call activate_notebook if they explicitly ask to be taken there.' This gives a clear when-not with an alternative. Also states the binding behavior ('if it isn't already bound to a notebook'), which helps decide when to invoke.

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