bookshelf_get_queue_details

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'List' is consistent. The description adds minor context by specifying the filtering scope (author or books) but does not disclose other behaviors like defaults for include_book/include_author, pagination, or how the output is organized. Thus it provides a bit beyond annotations but lacks depth.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no wasted words. It is concise and easily parsed.

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?

The tool has 4 optional parameters, no schema descriptions, and only a readOnlyHint annotation. The description is too terse to be complete; it fails to convey parameter semantics, usage context, or what 'detailed' entails. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the missing input documentation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the parameters. It only hints at author_id and book_ids via 'for an author or books' but does not explain include_book or include_author, nor whether parameters can be combined or what happens if none are provided. This is inadequate for a 4-parameter tool.

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 verb 'List' with resource 'detailed queue items' and scoping 'for an author or books,' which is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like bookshelf_list_queue and bookshelf_get_queue_status. It could be more explicit about the difference from list_queue, but it is clear enough.

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 instead of alternatives like bookshelf_list_queue, bookshelf_get_queue_status, or bookshelf_grab_queue_item. The description doesn't mention any exclusions or alternative tools. It only states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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