Books by a publisher

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those annotations: entries are editions with pricing in Toman and discount, and `no_current_offer: true` usually means out of stock, with book_editions as a confirmation path. This does not contradict any annotation.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and each clause contributes either output semantics or a practical caveat. Nothing is redundant or extraneous.

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 list tool with one required parameter, enum sort, pagination, and safety annotations, the description supplies the key output semantics and the important out-of-stock caveat. It does not enumerate every possible return field or pagination behavior, but with no output schema and strong annotations, the provided information is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 75%, with page, limit, and publisher_id already described; sort has an enum but no gloss. The description does not add parameter-level guidance beyond the schema, so it neither compensates for nor detracts from the schema documentation. A baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 the specific scope ('the catalogue of one publisher') and the result unit ('editions with price in Toman and discount'), making the tool's role clear. It is distinguishable from broad search tools, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative or use an action verb beyond the noun 'catalogue'.

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 intended use is implied: get a single publisher's catalogue. The only explicit usage guidance is the caveat that `no_current_offer: true` usually means out of stock and that you should confirm with book_editions. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer publisher_books over related tools like search_books, browse_tag, or person_books.

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