st.worldbook.entries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation ('List entries') and narrows the return to 'core trigger and insertion fields', but it does not disclose pagination, sorting, error behavior, or the exact field set. This is adequate for a simple list tool but not rich.

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?

One sentence, no filler; the verb and resource are front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter, read-only list tool the description is minimally sufficient, but without an output schema it leaves ambiguity about the exact return fields and the format of the 'book' value. It gives an agent a starting point but not full end-to-end clarity.

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 input schema has a single required 'book' string and no descriptions, so the description must compensate. It only says 'from one worldbook', which loosely ties the parameter to a worldbook reference but never names 'book' or explains whether it expects an ID, name, or object. The hint is helpful but incomplete.

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 names the operation ('List') and resource ('entries') and scopes it to 'one worldbook', which separates it from sibling tools like st.worldbook.list (which lists books, not entries). The phrase 'with core trigger and insertion fields' adds specificity about what is returned.

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 implies a use case — fetch entries for a particular worldbook — but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives such as st.worldbook.inspect or st.mvu.entries, nor when not to use it. There is no exclusion or alternative naming, so the guidance is only implicit.

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