get_my_bookmarks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly indicates a list operation, but does not mention authentication prerequisites, error behavior, pagination semantics, or whether any side effects occur. Given the complete lack of annotation support, this is a notable gap.

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 clear sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the verb and resource immediately, and every word contributes meaning. No unnecessary details or repetition.

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?

For a simple list operation with two optional pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but sparse. It does not mention authentication requirements, return value shape, or pagination behavior. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, these omissions leave an agent partly guessing about how to invoke and interpret the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention page or size at all. While the schema provides type, default, and bounds, the tool description adds no semantic meaning about how pagination works or how these parameters affect results. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('the authenticated user's saved/bookmarked listings'). It unambiguously identifies this as a read operation for bookmarks, distinguishing it from the sibling tool get_my_listings, which would return the user's own listings rather than saved ones.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_my_listings or search_listings. It implies the user must be authenticated, but does not state that login is required or refer to any sibling tool or differentiator. The agent receives no contextual direction for choosing this tool.

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