zotero_list_libraries

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

With no annotations, the description carries the responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does add value by specifying that only accessible libraries are returned, but it does not mention return format, error behavior, or any setup dependencies (e.g., zotero_check_setup). The behavioral coverage is minimal.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which likely documents the return structure), the description provides the essential context about what the tool lists and the access scope. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, though a bit more context about when to use it could push it to 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so no parameter description is needed. Per calibration guidance, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters, and the description does not need to elaborate on parameter 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'libraries', and clarifies the scope as 'personal library and any group libraries you can access.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list_* tools (e.g., list_collections, list_tags) which target different Zotero resources.

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 clearly implies the use case: to enumerate libraries the user can access, which is a natural prerequisite for operations that need a library ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource type is unambiguous among sibling list tools, so the context is clear enough.

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