get_book

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already communicates the read-only nature. The description adds the scope of returned information but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, potential null cases, or how read progress is determined. With annotation coverage, a middle score is appropriate.

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 with no filler, front-loading the action ('Get') and listing the key aspects. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter.

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?

The tool has a simple schema with one parameter and an output schema is present. The description covers the high-level purpose and expected content areas. While it could mention edge cases or permissions, it is largely complete for a straightforward read-only API.

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 (book_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not elaborate on it. However, the parameter's meaning is likely clear from the name and the tool's purpose. Still, the description could have clarified the expected format or source of book_id for better disambiguation.

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 clearly identifies it as a getter for a single book's details, media information, metadata, and read progress. The scope is specific, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_book_pages or get_book_next, which might have overlapping capabilities.

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 like search_books or get_book_pages. There is no mention of prerequisites or context (e.g., need a book_id), leaving the agent to infer usage from the parameter.

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