get_book_list

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds important behavior: 'Returns unique books (one entry per Archive.org identifier)' and 'without filters, results are arbitrary'. This goes beyond annotations and provides useful 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?

The description is concise and well-structured: a brief summary followed by a parameter list and return description. Every sentence is informative, and it is front-loaded with the core function.

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?

The description covers the purpose, all parameters, and return fields. Given the presence of an output schema and the tool's simplicity, the description is complete and leaves no obvious gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description's parameter details are largely redundant, but it adds helpful examples (e.g., 'Kant', 'ethics', 'eng') and clarifies case-insensitive substring matching. This adds moderate value.

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 clearly states 'List books in the Alexandria collection, optionally filtered by author, subject or language.' This is specific, with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_texts by focusing on metadata listing.

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 recommends using at least one filter to avoid arbitrary results. However, it does not explicitly compare to the sibling tool search_texts, leaving some ambiguity about when to use which. Still, the guidance is helpful.

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