Book details

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns a vote-weighted rating, an editions summary with buyability and pricing details, and a compact list. It also mentions 'compact' to set expectations about output size, which goes 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 a single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Everything about one book') before enumerating the specific data points. It ends with a clear routing instruction to book_editions. Every clause earns its place with zero redundancy.

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 read-only summary tool with annotations covering safety and schema covering parameters, the description is complete. It clearly defines the output scope and the alternative for deeper data. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the description's enumeration of what is returned, and no critical usage condition is missing.

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 100%, so all three parameters (id, editions_limit, include_description) are already documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides; it mentions 'compact list' which relates to editions_limit, but that's already implied. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 states the tool's scope: 'Everything about one book (work)' and enumerates the exact contents (description, highlights, categories, rating, editions summary, compact list). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool book_editions by explicitly noting it provides a summary rather than full per-edition data.

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 explicitly says 'Use book_editions for full per-edition data and filters,' providing a clear when-not condition and naming the alternative. This tells an agent exactly when to choose this tool over its sibling, leaving no ambiguity.

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