bookshelf_list_wanted_cutoff

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is consistent with 'List', but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation. There is no mention of pagination behavior, default sorting, or response details.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main action, but the parameter list is largely redundant with the schema. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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?

With 6 optional parameters, no usage context, and nearby sibling tools like list_wanted_missing, the description is inadequate for an agent to reliably select and invoke this tool. The output schema exists but doesn't compensate for the lack of guidance.

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%, and the description merely renames parameters (e.g., pageSize vs page_size) without explaining their meaning, valid values, or interactions. It does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'List wanted cutoff' with a clear verb and resource, but 'cutoff' is ambiguous and not explained. It does not differentiate from the singular get_wanted_cutoff or the related list_wanted_missing resource.

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. The description only lists query parameters without any contextual or exclusionary information.

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