bookshelf_delete_book

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description repeats this with the DESTRUCTIVE warning. It also mentions query params (deleteFiles, addImportListExclusion) but does not explain their behavioral implications, such as deleting physical files or adding an exclusion entry. This adds minimal new context beyond 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 short and front-loaded, but the middle sentence 'Query params: deleteFiles, addImportListExclusion' is largely redundant with the schema and does not earn its place. It is concise but could be restructured to include more informative content without added verbosity.

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 destructive operation, the description lacks critical context such as what gets deleted (e.g., metadata only or files on disk), whether the action is reversible, and any operational prerequisites. The presence of an output schema helps, but the description still fails to provide sufficient context for safe invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter explanations. It only lists 'deleteFiles' and 'addImportListExclusion' without describing their purpose or effect, adding no meaningful value beyond the schema's parameter names and defaults.

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 'Delete book' clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'delete_author' or 'delete_bookfile'. This is a specific verb+resource construction that leaves no ambiguity about the tool's primary function.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'bookshelf_bulk_delete_book' or other delete tools. The description lacks any context about delimiters (e.g., single vs. bulk) or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.

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