apple_books_author

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that data is pulled from Apple Books' public catalog page, suggesting a read-only operation with no special access. It also reveals what is returned (author metadata, full ebook/audiobook bibliography) and includes a caveat ('where available') about audiobook inclusion, which adds context beyond the tool name.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Retrieve an Apple Books author's bibliography') before elaborating on return contents. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler. This is a model of concise, structured tool description.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. It gives enough detail for an agent to select it for author bibliography needs. However, it could be more explicit about the exact structure or fields in the returned bibliography (e.g., titles, formats, metadata), but the high-level overview is sufficient for basic selection.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all three parameters: id (Apple Books numeric author ID), lang (result language tag), and country (two-letter storefront country code). Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add parameter details, and it does not. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description adds no extra semantic nuance.

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 the tool's function: 'Retrieve an Apple Books author's bibliography.' It specifies the resource (author) and the action (retrieve bibliography), and further details that it returns author metadata and full ebook/audiobook bibliography. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apple_books_book or apple_books_search, which focus on individual books or search results, not author-centric bibliographies.

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 usage when you need an author's bibliography from Apple Books, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as goodreads_author_books or apple_books_search. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given, so the usage context is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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