resolve_library

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the disclosure burden. 'Resolve' implies a read-only operation and 'account token only' hints at an auth constraint, but the description does not clarify whether account_token is required, how session_token behaves, what errors may occur, or whether any side effects exist.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and output. It is concise, though the parenthetical 'account token only' is slightly cryptic and could be clearer.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, this one-liner is too thin. It leaves auth semantics, token requirements, and details about the returned repo_id unspecified, so an agent lacks enough context to invoke it confidently.

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 compensate. It gives some meaning to library_name and account_token, but session_token is never mentioned, token formats or requirements are not explained, and repo_id is left undefined.

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 and resource ('Resolve a library name to its repo_id'), making the action clear as a lookup/translation. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_libraries and get_library_info by its focus on producing a repo_id, though it does not explicitly contrast with those tools.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parenthetical 'account token only' hints at a constraint but does not explain when to prefer resolve_library over get_library_info, list_libraries, or auth-related sibling tools.

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