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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate that. It adds one useful behavior: returns works with IDs acceptable to other Siftivo tools, which helps with chaining. However, it doesn't mention pagination, sorting, or result structure, so transparency is limited beyond what annotations provide.

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 with no filler. The core action and scope are stated immediately, and the output format is mentioned briefly. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is efficient.

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 search tool, the description covers the essential purpose and output format (IDs usable by other tools). It doesn't mention result ranking or pagination, but limit is in the schema with defaults. Given no output schema, the description does enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though more detail on result count or ordering would be helpful.

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 covers 67% of parameters with descriptions (query and isFiction), but the description adds no parameter-specific information. It doesn't explain limit's meaning or mention the boolean filter, so the description fails to compensate for the uncovered parameter. With only partial schema coverage, this is a gap.

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 ('search') and resource ('Siftivo book catalog'), and clarifies what fields are matched (titles, authors, descriptions). It also notes the output is 'works with the ids other Siftivo tools accept,' which distinguishes it from direct-lookup siblings like get_book or get_author by emphasizing it returns IDs for further tool calls.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like recommend_from_titles or what_to_read_next. The description implies it is for keyword search, but doesn't state when it should be preferred or excluded, leaving the agent to infer context.

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