Get Reknihy book detail

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds a useful provenance detail about the ID source, but says nothing about return shape or error behavior, which is acceptable but not exceptional for a simple getter.

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?

One concise sentence that front-loads the action and immediately identifies the source of the required ID. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is nearly complete. It does not detail the shape of the returned book details, but the title and description communicate the intended result sufficiently.

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 input schema already fully documents the 'id' parameter with type, bounds, and meaning. The description adds value by specifying that this ID is returned from search_books, which clarifies how an agent should obtain and use it.

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 ('Get') and resource ('book details'), and anchors the lookup key to 'the numeric product ID returned from search_books.' This clearly differentiates it from find_book_by_isbn, which would use an ISBN instead.

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?

It states the intended path: use this tool with a product ID that came from search_books. This gives clear context, though it does not explicitly exclude when to use find_book_by_isbn as an alternative.

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