get_bestsellers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that ctx is injected automatically and that the return is a 'Formatted best-seller list,' implying a read-only operation. However, it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, error behavior for invalid slugs/dates, or date-range boundaries.

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 Args/Returns structure is front-loaded and easy to scan, with no wasted prose. The ctx line is boilerplate but brief, and the size is appropriate for a 3-parameter tool.

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 further, and the parameters are documented. The remaining gap is the absence of guidance on discovering valid list_name slugs and on date semantics at range boundaries.

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 does so well: it explains list_name is a slug with two concrete examples and that date accepts YYYY-MM-DD or 'current' for the latest, plus the auto-injected ctx. It stops short of documenting the full set of valid slugs.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get the NYT Best Sellers list.' This clearly distinguishes it from the article/story-oriented siblings (search_articles, get_top_stories, get_newswire), though it doesn't name or contrast with any alternative.

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 by the purpose (retrieve a best-seller list), but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The siblings are unrelated resources, so confusion is low, but the description adds nothing beyond the obvious.

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