goodreads_book_editions

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 discloses pagination, the specific fields returned, the extra internal request to resolve the separate work id, and the upstream error when no editions data exists. This is rich, honest behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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, each adding value: purpose and scope, return fields, and behavioral caveat/error. It is dense but not bloated, and the main purpose is front-loaded. Slightly longer than the two-sentence ideal but justified by the important caveats.

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 complexity (extra internal request, error behavior, pagination) and the absence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers what data is returned, how pagination works, the work-id mismatch, and the failure mode, giving an agent enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% for both parameters (id and page), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that the id is a 'book id in the path' and that Goodreads keys by a separate work id, which clarifies why an extra request is made. It also implies the page parameter via 'paginated edition list'.

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 begins with 'List a Goodreads book's editions', which uses a specific verb and resource, and clearly differentiates from siblings like goodreads_book and goodreads_author_books by focusing on editions. It even clarifies the scope as 'every other translation, printing, and format of the requested book id'.

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?

Usage context is implied but not explicit. The description states the tool returns all editions of a book, which suggests when to use it, but it does not name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. There is no explicit comparison with sibling tools like goodreads_book or goodreads_search.

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