zotero_item_collections

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

Annotations already establish the read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive nature. The description adds valuable behavior beyond that: child attachment/note keys are resolved to their top-level parent item. This is a concrete behavioral detail that affects output and is not covered by 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a critical edge-case behavior. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only lookup with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and the key child-resolution case. It omits explicit return structure, but the output schema covers that. The description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the 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?

The schema provides only a 'key' string with no description. The description indirectly clarifies that 'key' identifies an item and mentions how child keys are handled, adding meaningful context. However, it does not explicitly state that the key is the item whose collections are returned, nor does it describe the key format. The description compensates partially but not fully for the 0% schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Show every Zotero collection containing an item.' This is a specific verb-resource pairing and distinct from sibling tools like zotero_collections (listing collections) or zotero_collection_items (listing items in a collection). The added note about resolving child attachment/note keys to parent items further refines the scope.

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 implicitly conveys when to use the tool: when you have an item key and need to know which collections contain it. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases. Since the tool's purpose itself defines its usage, it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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