list_sharing_labels

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

The annotation readOnlyHint: true already discloses that the operation is read-only. The description adds the behavior that the labels are 'distinct' (deduplicated), which is a small behavioral addition. No contradictions with annotations, but no deeper traits like auth or rate limits are disclosed.

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, focused sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool and front-loaded with the action.

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?

Despite an output schema and read-only annotation, the description is too terse for a tool with 9 optional filter parameters. It fails to mention that labels can be filtered by series, library, readlist, or collection, nor does it explain what sharing labels are. This leaves significant gaps for 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning, but it does not. The parameter names (page, size, sort, search, series_id, etc.) are somewhat self-explanatory, but their roles as filters are never clarified. The description adds no parameter-related value.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('sharing labels'), clearly indicating the tool retrieves distinct sharing labels. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tags or list_genres, which target different metadata.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. It simply states what it does without contextual cues about filters or typical use cases.

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