guide

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Usage notes for this server' indicates an informational, non-destructive tool, which is useful, but it does not explicitly state that no state is modified, what the returned notes contain, or any limiting 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 extremely compact: one clear statement of purpose plus a brief topic list. Every element contributes, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with a single optional enum parameter and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. The description plus schema are sufficient for an agent to request a valid topic and understand it is receiving usage guidance, though a bit more detail about each topic would improve completeness.

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 compensate, but it only repeats the enum values without explaining what each topic returns or how to decide which topic to request. The parameter's meaning remains thin: an agent knows topic names but not their content.

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?

'Usage notes for this server' clearly identifies the tool as an instructions/help resource, and the topic list conveys its scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by signaling that it provides guidance about topics like abort and notebooks rather than performing those operations, though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieve' or 'return'.

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 that this tool should be consulted when the agent needs usage guidance on the listed topics, while the sibling tools are the actual operations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of a sibling or provide guidance on choosing among the topics.

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