bookshelf_test_importlist

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

Annotations already denote a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds a 'WRITE: this modifies your Bookshelf instance' warning, which clarifies side effects but lacks detail (e.g., whether it's reversible, what state changes). This is modest additional context.

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, with the WRITE warning separated for emphasis. However, the first sentence is vague, and the query param reference is not aligned with the schema, reducing clarity.

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 tool modifies an instance and has an output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain the purpose of the test, what the body should contain, or the effect of force_test. Sibling tools for testing all importlists provide a contrast, but no guidance here.

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 defines 'body' and 'force_test' with no descriptions. The description mentions 'Query params: forceTest' but uses a different name than the schema's 'force_test', and ignores the 'body' parameter entirely. This fails to clarify how to invoke the 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 'Create importlist test' is ambiguous—it's unclear if the tool creates a test import list or runs a test on an existing import list. Sibling tools like bookshelf_create_importlist and bookshelf_test_all_importlist suggest different actions, but this description doesn't differentiate from them.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. It doesn't mention when to use this over bookshelf_test_all_importlist or bookshelf_create_importlist, or any alternatives/exclusions.

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