Search books

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It does disclose that results include bookId and available formats, which is valuable behavioral information. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention any side effects, limits, or sorting behavior, leaving some ambiguity for a tool without annotation hints.

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 two concise sentences: the first states purpose and output, the second gives usage guidance. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the action.

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?

The tool is simple with only two parameters and no output schema. The description covers what it does, when to use it, and what it returns, which is sufficient for basic invocation. It lacks details on pagination or result ordering, but these are not critical for a search tool and are partially addressed by the schema's limit parameter.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that query can be by title, author, or series, which adds minimal value beyond the schema. It does not introduce new parameter semantics or clarify edge cases.

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 tool's function: searching the library by title, author, or series, and returning books with bookId and formats. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_in_book (in-text search) and get_book (specific book retrieval) by explicitly framing this as the initial discovery step.

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 explicitly instructs to use this tool first before reading text and to confirm EPUB availability, giving a clear contextual scenario. It does not explicitly list alternatives or 'when not to use', but the directive is strong enough to guide appropriate usage.

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