get_series

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns a nested object '{ series }' with a volume list and positions, and specifies a 404 error for unknown series. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it does not detail side effects or rate limits, which are unnecessary for a read-only tool.

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: first states the core function and output structure, second mentions error behavior, third gives usage context and a constraint. It is front-loaded with the most critical information and contains no superfluous words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, input source, output structure, and error handling. The only minor gap is that it doesn't explicitly state the output format when successful, but the 'Returns { series }' phrasing is sufficient.

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 has 100% description coverage, meaning the schema already fully documents the parameter series_id with a description. The description adds value by clarifying that the series_id is a UUID from a book's `series` metadata, and confirms it does not accept names. With full schema coverage, baseline is 3, and this extra context raises it to 4.

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 the tool retrieves a book series and its ordered volumes by series UUID, with a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('series'), and unique identifier type ('series UUID'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying that it returns the volume list with positions, which is a distinct function from other tools like get_book or search_books.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('to enumerate every volume in a series and their reading order') and how to obtain the required identifier ('series_id from a book's `series` metadata via get_book or search_books'). It also states what the tool does not accept ('a name'), preventing misuse.

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