reading_list_annotations

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

The description does not contradict the readOnlyHint annotation (it states a listing operation). However, it adds no behavioral details beyond the annotation, such as pagination, ordering, or sync behavior. The annotation carries the transparency burden, and the description is neutral.

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 of 9 words with no wasted text. It front-loads the action and resource, then lists filters efficiently. Every word serves a purpose.

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 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but covers the basic operation. It does not explain what annotations are, what fields are returned, or whether pagination exists. For a simple list tool with readOnlyHint, a score of 3 is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 mentions 4 of 6 parameters (book, chunk, kind, author) using natural language, but omits 'status' and 'parentId'. This adds some meaning but is incomplete, so a score of 3 is appropriate (baseline 4 minus 1 for missing two params).

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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'annotations', and lists specific filter dimensions (book, chunk, kind, author). It clearly distinguishes from sibling list tools like reading_list_books and reading_list_chunks because it targets a different resource.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for listing annotations with optional filters, but does not mention exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is derived only from the resource name.

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