Get reading sessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates the read-only nature (Get), pagination, and the inclusion of aggregate statistics, which is solid transparency. It could mention auth or error handling, but for a read tool the core behavior is well covered.

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 that front-loads the core purpose and packs in essential details (single-book scope, pagination, stats) without any unnecessary words. It is highly efficient and well structured.

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 a tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the agent can expect: a paginated history plus aggregate stats. It doesn't describe return shapes or error conditions, but given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of sibling tools with similar patterns, it is sufficiently complete.

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 already provides descriptive coverage for all three parameters (bookId, page, pageSize) with 100% coverage. The description does not add detail about the parameters beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resource ('reading-session history for one book by bookId'), and highlights pagination and aggregate stats, making it distinct from sibling tools like get_reading_stats or get_reading_progress that target broader or different scopes.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (per-book session history) and indicates pagination behavior. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion scenarios, so it stops short of a 5, but the context is unambiguous.

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