Submit a book as an answer to a community prompt by providing the prompt ID and book ID.
Submit a book as an answer to a community book prompt.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| book_id | Yes | Hardcover book ID to submit as the answer. | |
| prompt_id | Yes | Hardcover prompt ID (use get_prompts to find IDs). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description conveys a write/submit operation, but with no annotations it omits side effects such as whether an existing answer is replaced, whether duplicates are allowed, or what happens on success or failure.
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?
A single, direct sentence conveys the entire purpose without filler or unnecessary detail.
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 two-parameter write operation, the description covers what and how; it does not describe return values, but the lack of an output schema and the tool's simplicity make this a minor omission.
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?
Both parameters are described and the descriptions add helpful context (Hardcover IDs and using get_prompts to find prompt IDs), though they do not specify constraints like positive integers or required existing entities.
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?
States the exact action (submit), the object (a book), and the target (a community book prompt), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's primary 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?
Clear from the verb and target that this is the action for answering a prompt; however, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or note when not to use it, though no sibling serves the same purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.