Source Add Play Book

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that publisher-blocked titles are refused up front, that processing is asynchronous, that wait=true blocks until READY, and that the source reads back as expert_intelligence. Auth/permission requirements remain unstated, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then layers the id source, the exportability caveat, notebook handling, output type, and async/wait behavior without filler. Slightly dense, but each sentence earns its place.

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 an async mutation tool with an output schema, it covers the operational essentials an agent needs: id provenance, refusal condition, blocking behavior, and backend scope. Return value detail is correctly delegated to the output schema.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all three params and does: content_id is a volume id from source_list_play_books, notebook accepts a name or ID, and wait=true blocks until READY. Every parameter gains meaning beyond the bare types.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Add a Google Play Book as a source by its content id') and qualifies it with the 'Expert Intelligence' type, which cleanly distinguishes it from source_add and source_add_drive_file. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Routes the agent to source_list_play_books for obtaining the content_id and states the exportability prerequisite. It lacks an explicit 'use this instead of source_add_drive_file when...' exclusion, so it stops just short of the 5 tier.

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