Bulk retag

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

The description mentions the preview parameter (default true) to show changes without applying them, and that setting preview to false applies changes. This aligns with the destructiveHint annotation. However, it could further emphasize the irreversible nature of the action when preview is false.

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 extremely concise, with two sentences that convey purpose and usage. There is no redundancy or unnecessary information.

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?

The description covers key aspects like action types, preview mode, and limit. However, it does not explain the return format (e.g., summary of changes) or edge cases like empty query results. Given the complexity and destructive nature, slightly more detail could be beneficial.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds minimal extra value, such as providing search query examples. Since the schema already covers semantics well, the description does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 that the tool adds, removes, or replaces tags for books matching a search query. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like search or get operations.

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 examples of when to use the tool, such as categorizing all books by an author or cleaning up tag names. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like individual retagging.

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