get_bookmarks

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: it discloses that results are only 'partial' and that bookmark folders are not traversed, which tells the agent not to rely on this for complete bookmark retrieval.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately qualified by the partial-results and folder-scope caveats. Zero waste.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. However, with two undocumented parameters and no explicit usage routing, the description leaves gaps an agent would need to resolve elsewhere.

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, and it largely does not. 'Bounded' loosely gestures at the limit parameter, but the required 'account' parameter and the meaning/default of 'limit' are never explained in the description.

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 (read) and resource (default bookmarks feed) with scope qualifiers ('bounded', 'default feed'). The note that 'bookmark folders are not traversed' helps distinguish it from a full bookmark traversal, though it does not name the specific siblings (bookmark_tweet, remove_bookmark) it relates to.

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?

Usage is implied through scope ('default bookmarks feed') but there is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus alternatives like get_home_feed or search_tweets, and no conditions or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer the context.

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