audible_editorial_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states this is an HTML scrape of a marketing page, not the API, implying potential fragility or inconsistency. It also discloses the output format (shelves with headings and ordered ASINs) and a specific limitation (Best of the Year not covered). This goes beyond a generic description and is useful for an agent.

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 three sentences and well-structured, starting with the action, then the output, then complementary tools and a limitation. It is informative without being verbose, and the key points are front-loaded. Slightly more conciseness could be achieved, but it is appropriately sized.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must be self-sufficient. It explains the return format (shelves with headings and ordered ASINs), how to use the results with other tools, and a specific limitation. It does not mention pagination or error handling, but for a single-list scrape tool with a constrained enum, the description is reasonably complete.

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 already documents the single 'list' parameter with an enum and a description ('Editorial list slug'), giving 100% coverage. The description does not add further meaning about how to choose among the enum values, though the enum values (audiobooks, booktok, podcasts) are self-explanatory. It mentions 'Best of the Year' is not covered, which indirectly clarifies that the enum is exhaustive for supported lists, but this is marginal.

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 retrieves an Audible curated editorial list and describes the output as normalized themed shelves with heading and ordered ASINs. It distinguishes itself from product detail tools by specifying it is an HTML scrape and pointing to product endpoints for full details. The explicit exclusion of 'Best of the Year' further clarifies scope.

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 instructs how to use the returned ASINs with GET /audible/products or /audible/product for full details, providing a clear next-step workflow. It also notes the 'Best of the Year' list is not covered due to layout inconsistency, which is an exclusion. It does not name sibling tool names directly but references their endpoints, which is adequate.

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