Google Books Search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Scrape' hints at a web-scraping operation, and engine values are listed, but nothing is said about rate limits, auth requirements, pagination via start/num, or reliability. For a scraper with zero annotation coverage this is a significant 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?

Two compact lines with the core purpose front-loaded followed by the engine enumeration. No padding, though the trailing parenthetical reference to google_web_search is slightly cryptic for a standalone description.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained. However, for a 6-parameter tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is too thin: it omits pagination, locale, and result-count semantics. It leaves an agent under-informed about how to call this tool correctly.

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% across 6 parameters, yet the description only explains one (engine: auto|http|proxy|browser). The query, gl (locale), hl (language), num, and start parameters remain undefined in both schema and description, leaving most of the contract unclear and requiring the agent to guess at formats and semantics.

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 (Scrape) and resource (Google Books Search, with the tbm=bks identifier) plus the returned fields (title, URL, snippet). This distinguishes it from generic search siblings, though it doesn't name a specific alternative tool. Clear and actionable, but no explicit sibling routing.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings like google_search, google_scholar_search, or google_web_search. The only cross-reference is a parenthetical pointing to google_web_search for the engine parameter, which is about configuration, not selection. An agent gets no routing help.

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