Skip to main content
Glama

ReadingRate

Get book details

get_book_details
Read-onlyIdempotent

Gives one book's full ReadingRate analysis and shows its difficulty profile as a radar chart: nine difficulty dimensions and four literary-regard dimensions, each scored 0 to 100 with a written reason, plus the book's description, genres, themes, word count, reading time, authors, awards and editions. awards holds prizes and canonical lists; taught_in holds the school curricula and exam boards that set the book, which are not awards.

Use when the user asks how hard a specific book is, what makes it difficult, how long it takes to read, whether it has won prizes, or for details about it. To find books that match a description, use search_books. To set two or three books side by side, use compare_books.

Identify the book with exactly one of book_id, slug or title_author.

Difficulty dimensions: vocabulary_complexity, syntactic_complexity, abstraction_level and information_density (how hard the prose is); narrative_indirection, symbolic_density, ironic_distance, resolution_withholding and structural_complexity (how hard the meaning is). Regard dimensions: canonical_status, critical_acclaim, literary_influence, author_standing.

Examples:

  • {"slug": "crime-and-punishment"}

  • {"title_author": {"title": "The Great Gatsby", "author": "Fitzgerald"}}

  • {"slug": "beloved", "include_similar": true}

  • {"slug": "war-and-peace", "include_time_estimate": true}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoThe book's ReadingRate slug, e.g. "crime-and-punishment"
book_idNoThe book's ReadingRate id, from another ReadingRate tool's results
title_authorNoThe book's title and author. Close spellings match.
include_similarNoAlso list books similar to this one
include_time_estimateNoAlso estimate how long the book takes to read at the average reader's pace (the reader's own pace is in get_currently_reading)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoWork UUID, for book_id arguments of other tools
slugYes
yearNo
titleYes
awardsNo
genresNo
authorsYes
cover_urlNo
taught_inNoSchool curricula and exam boards that set the book (not awards)
difficultyYes
word_countNo
regard_overallNo
reading_time_minutesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context about the return content (e.g., radar chart scores with written reasons, awards vs. taught_in distinction) and includes examples of parameter usage, though it does not discuss error cases or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with front-loaded purpose, followed by usage guidance, identification rules, dimension explanations, and examples. While comprehensive, the list of difficulty and regard dimensions is somewhat lengthy; however, each part serves a clear purpose in helping the agent understand the tool's output.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (many dimensions, nested parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides ample context about what the tool does and when to use it, including all necessary constraints and alternatives. Nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema describes each parameter. The description adds the crucial constraint that exactly one of book_id, slug, or title_author must be provided, which is not enforced by the schema (none are required). It also implies the optionality of include_similar and include_time_estimate through examples but doesn't elaborate beyond schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool provides a book's full ReadingRate analysis, including a difficulty profile as a radar chart with nine difficulty and four literary-regard dimensions, plus metadata like description, genres, word count, etc. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming search_books for finding books and compare_books for side-by-side comparison.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit usage scenarios: when the user asks about difficulty, reading time, awards, or details about a specific book. It also names alternatives (search_books for discovery, compare_books for comparison) and states the identification constraint (exactly one of book_id, slug, or title_author).

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.