open_notebook_notebooks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior not in the annotations: result ordering and the offset-based paging loop. It stops short of disclosing that archived notebooks are excluded by default, which is the main hidden behavioral detail here.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the paging hint. Every sentence 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and this is a simple three-parameter list tool whose paging contract is stated. The remaining gap is the unstated filter behavior of include_archived and any limit ceiling, which slightly underspecifies a small tool.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it only clarifies offset — implying the response returns a next_offset value. The limit and include_archived parameters (including the default of excluding archived items) are left entirely unexplained.

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 gives a clear verb and resource ("List your notebooks") plus the sort order ("most recently updated first"), so an agent knows exactly what this returns. It doesn't name or rule out a sibling like open_notebook_search or open_notebook_notes, but the resource noun is distinct enough to differentiate in practice.

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 second sentence gives concrete pagination guidance ("Page with offset=<next_offset>"), which is actionable. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over open_notebook_search or open_notebook_notes, and no mention of whether archived notebooks appear, so usage is only implied.

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