bookshelf_list_history_author

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description offers no behavioral insight. It doesn't explain how filters like authorId or includeAuthor affect results, what eventType values are valid, or any side effects. The description adds minimal context beyond 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 short but under-specified. It is not verbose, but the single sentence is too vague to be useful. It does front-load the action and then lists params, but the action itself is meaningless.

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?

With 0% schema coverage and a vague description, the tool is severely underspecified. The output schema exists but doesn't compensate for missing parameter semantics, behavioral context, or usage guidance. An agent would struggle to invoke this tool correctly.

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 carry parameter semantics. It merely lists parameter names in mismatched casing (authorId vs author_id) without explaining what each parameter does, what values are acceptable, or how they interact. This adds no value beyond the schema's property names.

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 history author' is an ungrammatical restatement of the tool name, adding no clarity. It fails to specify whether this lists author history or history filtered by author, and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like bookshelf_list_history or bookshelf_list_history_since.

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 instead of the alternative history-listing tools. There are no usage contexts, exclusions, or mentions of alternatives.

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