bookshelf_update_bookfile

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a clear 'WRITE: this modifies your Bookshelf instance,' reinforcing the write aspect, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency, partial updates, or side effects. It adds minimal value beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences, both carrying useful information (action and write warning). It is front-loaded and free of fluff, though it is arguably too brief to be genuinely helpful, which slightly reduces the score.

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's complexity (nested object parameter, output schema) and the existence of sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain when to use this update tool over bulk_update_bookfile or update_book, and it omits any prerequisite or effect details. The output schema is present but the description still lacks essential context for proper selection.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description provides no meaning for the parameters. 'Update bookfile' does not explain what 'body' contains or how 'id' is used. The tool relies entirely on the schema, which has no descriptions, leaving users without guidance on parameter values.

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 'Update bookfile,' which clearly identifies the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like bookshelf_update_book or bookshelf_bulk_update_bookfile, as it offers no scope or distinguishing details beyond the name itself.

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 versus alternatives. The description lacks context on prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, making it unclear how this differs from other update tools for bookfiles.

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