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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses exactly what gets destroyed: the reader's rating and progress for the book. It also scopes the operation to the signed-in reader's library, adding useful behavioral context.

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 sentences carry the core action, the consequence, and the routing to the alternative tool. There is no filler, 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?

For a single-parameter destructive operation with helpful annotations, the description covers what the tool does, what data is affected, whose shelf is affected, and when to use the sibling instead. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it successfully.

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 schema only defines workId as a string, and the description does not explicitly define workId. However, the phrase 'Take a book...entirely' makes it reasonably clear that workId identifies the book to remove, so the description partially compensates for the 0% schema coverage but stops short of explicit parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb-resource action: taking a book off the signed-in reader's shelves entirely, and explicitly mentions discarding rating and progress. It clearly distinguishes this from moving a book via add_to_library, so an agent can identify the correct tool.

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 explicitly contrasts the full-removal use case with the alternative use case: moving a book to a different shelf should be done with add_to_library using a new readingStatus. This gives the agent clear criteria for choosing this tool over its sibling.

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