x_api_get_users_bookmarks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It explicitly states 'Risk: read-only,' required OAuth 2 scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, and safety warnings about sensitive data. This is extensive behavioral disclosure beyond what a schema could provide.

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 uses clear section headings and fronts the purpose, but contains minor redundancies such as 'Use when: Get Bookmarks' and repeated read-only mentions. The length is largely justified by the complexity, and every section serves a 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?

The description includes prerequisites, auth resolution behavior, expected response shape, common failure conditions, recommended tools, safety warnings, and an example. Given that there is no output schema and no annotations, this is a strong effort, though it could elaborate on pagination semantics and the remaining parameters.

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 description covers parameter formats for id, max_results, and pagination_token, and explains environment-selection behavior for scopeTenantId, scopeUserId/AccountId, and credentialKey. However, it omits authorizationKey and preferredAuthType, and uses 'unknown' for the type of id and pagination_token, leaving some meaning unclear.

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 Bookmarks,' a clear verb+resource statement that identifies the tool's function. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like x_api_get_users_bookmarks_by_folder_id, but the name and generic phrasing make the core purpose evident.

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 includes a 'Do not use when' section that advises against using this tool when exploring or before auth/configuration, recommending x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion instead. It also lists prerequisite and follow-up tools, providing contextual guidance. However, it does not directly contrast with sibling bookmark tools, so it lacks complete exclusionary guidance.

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