audiobook_progress

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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=false, so the description must supply behavioral context, and it does: it walks every chapter page up to a shared fetch-all cap, reports scan coverage, and discloses the quota cost (1 audiobook GET + chapter page GETs). It does not state error/not-found behavior, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three tight, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the output fields come first, then the scan behavior, then the quota cost. 'Shared fetch-all cap' is slightly jargon-y but informative.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned metrics, and it covers the scanning/enumeration behavior and cost. Missing only edge-case behavior (e.g., audiobook not found) for a full 5.

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 100%, including the response_format enum, so the parameters are fully documented structurally. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the quota note, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (audiobook progress rollup) and enumerates the exact outputs: chapters total, played count, current chapter, percent complete. It is clearly distinguishable from all siblings, none of which report audiobook progress.

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 intent (fetch progress for an audiobook) is implied by the name and output list, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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