goodreads_genre

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels: it discloses the 50-book limit, lack of pagination, credential-free nature, and the folksonomy/taxonomy structure. It also details exact return fields, which is comprehensive for a one-parameter tool.

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 dense paragraph with no redundancy. Each sentence adds value: main action, output specification, tag format guidance, and limit disclosure. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 a simple single-parameter schema and no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers return fields, volume limits, tag taxonomy pitfalls, and credential requirements, leaving no significant gaps for an agent.

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 provides only 'Goodreads genre/shelf tag'; description enriches this with examples (fantasy, romance, science-fiction), clarifies slug format, and explains how to source valid tags (from book's genres[] field or goodreads.com). This far exceeds schema coverage.

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 opens with 'Get a Goodreads genre shelf', clearly stating the verb and resource. It specifies what the tool returns (up to 50 books with fields) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like goodreads_author_books or goodreads_search by focusing on the genre/shelf tag page.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use the tool: when you have a known genre/shelf tag. It explicitly states there's no directory endpoint and tells users to pass any known tag slug, giving concrete sourcing examples. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but the context is clear enough.

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