bookshelf_list_delayprofile

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention of pagination, ordering, default limits, or any other runtime behavior. It is a plain restatement of the tool's name with no additional value.

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, concise sentence with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it might be considered too terse given the lack of context. Still, for a simple list operation, it is appropriately sized.

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 zero parameters and presence of an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it does not explain what a delayprofile is, what the output represents, or how this list operation fits into the broader workflow. The tool is simple, but a bit more context would make it complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, as there are none to document.

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 'List delayprofile.' clearly states a specific verb (list) and resource (delayprofile), distinguishing it from related tools like get_delayprofile or reorder_delayprofile. However, it lacks additional scoping details (e.g., whether it returns all profiles) but is still unambiguous.

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 get_delayprofile (to fetch a single item) or other list tools. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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