get_publisher

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description adds the non-obvious resolution behavior (name → top search match) plus what the response includes. It stops short of stating failure behavior when nothing resolves or when multiple identifiers are supplied, which matters for an openWorld lookup.

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?

One tight passage with the lookup constraint front-loaded and the return shape trailing; every clause (identifier exclusivity, name resolution, editions paging) carries information the schema and annotations do not.

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 usefully names the returned fields, including the embedded book stubs and paging controls, so return values are covered. Remaining gap is edge-case behavior: no-result, ambiguous name, or multiple identifiers passed.

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, and the description exceeds it by explaining that exactly one identifier should be supplied, how name matching resolves, and that editions_limit/editions_offset page the embedded editions list.

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 a specific verb (look up) and resource (publisher), enumerates the three accepted identifier forms, and clarifies that a name resolves to the top match. An agent can distinguish this from get_book/get_author immediately.

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 parenthetical "provide one" states the selection constraint across id/slug/name, which is real usage guidance given zero required parameters. It does not name an alternative tool or say when to prefer this over search_books, so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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