get-list-bookmarks

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses the safe read-only nature, and the description adds a non-obvious behavior: smart lists are evaluated using their saved query. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent understand the subtle difference in handling smart lists.

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 concise sentences: the first states the primary action and input, the second clarifies a unique behavior. No filler or redundancy; every word earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description could have explained the return format, but the schema covers pagination and sorting parameters, and the description clarifies the smart-list evaluation. The tool is relatively simple, and the combination of description and schema is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 describes all five parameters with full coverage (100%). The description itself adds no additional parameter-specific information, so it stays at the baseline of 3 where the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('bookmarks in a list') with a clear scope ('by its stable id'). It also adds a distinguishing behavioral note about smart lists, which separates it from sibling tools like get-list or get-bookmark-lists.

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 the tool: when you have a stable list ID and want its bookmarks. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or reference sibling tools, but the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer appropriate usage.

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