infosys_books

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-destructive safety profile, so the description adds value by disclosing the sitemap download on first call (a few MB), the 7-day cache, and the TwinCAT 2 exclusion. These are genuine operational traits beyond the annotations.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: the core action leads, filters follow, and the caching note closes. It is dense but each clause carries information, with only minor run-on phrasing.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation. The description covers filtering, exclusions, and first-call cost/caching, leaving only the 'limit' parameter under-described.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents 'pattern' as a glob on the slug with concrete examples and enumerates all valid 'category' values, covering two of three params well; 'limit' is left undocumented, so it does not fully close the gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List Infosys books (documentation sets) from the site's own sitemap,' and adds what is returned (page counts, indexed-locally status). It is clearly a discovery/listing tool, though it does not explicitly name how it differs from siblings like infosys_index or infosys_search.

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 is implied—this is the listing/enumeration entry point—and it discloses the exclusion ('TwinCAT 2 books are excluded') plus filter semantics. However, it never explicitly says when to use this versus infosys_index or infosys_search, leaving the routing to inference.

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