list_books

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 mentions 'Live' registry, suggesting real-time data, but does not disclose whether there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if the registry is unavailable. It adds some context (the specific bookies covered) but lacks depth.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the key concept ('Live book registry') and provides specific examples. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly clearer about the tool's scope.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete in telling the agent what it returns (a list of books including examples). However, it lacks details about the output format, any filtering capabilities, or how this relates to other data tools. Given the simplicity, a 3 is fair.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds context about the content (list of specific books), which is the main value. With no parameters, a baseline of 4 applies, and the description adequately compensates by describing the resource.

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 states the tool lists books (DFS apps and sportsbooks), naming specific examples. It is somewhat clear but does not distinguish it from siblings like list_sports or list_capabilities. The purpose is evident but could be more explicit about what 'books' means in contrast to other list tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_sports or list_markets. There is no mention of exclusions or context. The description implies a registry lookup but does not explain when an agent should choose it.

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