poetry_search_by_title

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only the data source (PoetryDB); it does not say whether matching is case-sensitive or whether multiple poems can share a title.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the identifying information (action, field, provider) is front-loaded. For a one-parameter lookup, this is the right size.

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?

Given a one-param tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the definition is technically callable. But with no output schema, the description says nothing about what a returned poem record contains (author, lines, linecount) or whether multiple results are returned, which would materially help an agent chain calls.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains that 'title' accepts a full or partial title. The description repeats the concept ('by title') without adding format, matching rules, or examples, placing it at the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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 and resource ('Search poems by title') plus the upstream source (PoetryDB), so an agent knows exactly what it queries. It does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like poetry_search_by_author or poetry_random, so an agent must infer the distinction from the names alone.

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 'by title' phrasing implies the selection condition, and the schema's 'title or partial title' hints at substring matching. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over poetry_search_by_author or poetry_random, and no mention of result limits or how partial matches behave.

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