get_series_collections

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as pagination, ordering, or result format. However, with the annotation covering safety and an output schema present, the description meets the minimum threshold but does not enrich behavioral understanding.

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, short sentence that directly states the tool's function without any redundant words or filler. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It states the core action and resource, and the annotation and schema fill in the remaining details. There are no significant missing aspects that would confuse an agent.

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 includes a single required parameter series_id (string) with no description. The tool description 'List collections containing a series' implies that series_id is the series identifier, but it doesn't explicitly define it or provide format details. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter's name, yet the context makes the purpose of the parameter reasonably inferable.

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 'List collections containing a series' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_collection_series (which lists series in a collection) and list_collections (which lists all collections), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear context 'List collections containing a series' implies when to use: when you have a series_id and need to find which collections include it. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the tool's purpose is self-evident and provides sufficient guidance for the intended use case.

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