bookshelf_search

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 useful context: it targets the metadata provider, searches for 'new' items, and returns matches intended for adding. This goes beyond the annotation, though it doesn't disclose behaviors like pagination or behavior when term is omitted.

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 of 15 words, front-loaded with the verb and object. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or repetition.

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 tool with one optional parameter, a readOnly annotation, and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and usage context. It could mention how 'new' is determined or behavior with no term, but it's complete enough for a straightforward search tool.

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 schema has one parameter 'term' with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does by identifying term as the search query ('by term'), giving clear meaning. However, it doesn't explain optionality, matching behavior, or what happens when term is empty, but for a single param the core semantics are clear.

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 specific action: searching the metadata provider for new books/authors by term and returning matches to add. This clearly conveys the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling lookup/search tools like bookshelf_lookup_book or bookshelf_search_releases, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The description implies use when looking for new books/authors to add from the metadata provider, but it doesn't provide explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools. The intended context is clear but not directly stated.

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