List all annotations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It covers ordering ('newest-page first'), pagination mechanics, the structure of returned items (highlighted text, note, book title/author, chapter title), and the return of a stats summary. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the raw schema.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: scope, return content, pagination/filtering, and stats summary. No redundancy or filler.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description is thorough. It covers pagination, optional filtering, item attributes, and the stats summary, giving the agent enough to set expectations and invoke correctly. Complexity is low, and nothing critical is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how page and pageSize work together ('use page with the returned total/pageSize to browse') and what bookId does ('filter to one book'), which is not fully explicit in the schema. This enriches parameter understanding.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'annotations', with a specific scope: 'ALL of the user's annotations... across the whole library'. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing the comprehensive, library-wide coverage and the optional bookId filter. This is a specific and clear purpose.

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 gives clear usage context: it is the go-to tool for listing all annotations, with pagination and optional filtering. Mentioning 'use page with the returned total/pageSize to browse' and 'pass bookId to filter to one book' provides practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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