bookshelf_list_customformat

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates safety, and the description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, sorting, return format, authentication needs). It simply repeats the verb of the tool name, providing no value beyond the annotation.

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 concise (five words) but under-specified. It is front-loaded with the verb but lacks any defining detail. Being short is not the same as being informative; the single sentence does not fully earn its place as a useful tool description.

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 list tool, the description is too minimal. While the output schema and readOnlyHint cover return values and safety, the description does not clarify the entity being listed, any scope or filtering, or how this tool relates to similar ones. An agent selecting this tool would have to infer meaning from the tool name alone.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% vacuously. With no parameters to explain, the baseline score of 4 is appropriate; 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 states a clear verb ('list') and a resource ('customformat'), but it is extremely terse and does not specify what is listed (IDs, full objects, metadata) or what a customformat is. It also does not differentiate itself from sibling list/get tools such as list_customfilter or get_customformat.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like get_customformat, list_customfilter, or other list tools. The description provides no context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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