list_chapters_tool

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the behavioral trait that outline end_page may equal start_page, and advises using get_next_chunks to read further. It identifies the tool as chapter listing for indexed PDFs, adding context beyond a minimal description. Could mention prerequisites like indexing status.

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 concise with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose directly, followed by usage guidelines and an important note about edge cases. Every sentence adds value.

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 the simple input and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and an edge case. It could mention error conditions or prerequisites (e.g., document must be indexed), but overall it provides sufficient context for correct tool selection and invocation.

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 only parameter 'document' is described as a string but not detailed in the description. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should clarify the parameter's format or meaning (e.g., document ID, filename). It only implies it identifies a PDF, leaving ambiguity.

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 clearly states the tool lists chapters for indexed PDFs, specifically textbooks. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning pairing with get_section_content and get_next_chunks, and explicitly excludes uses for git branches, code modules, or non-PDF structures.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use criteria: when users ask about chapter numbers, titles, IDs, or page ranges. Also advises on pairing with other tools and warns about edge cases like equal start and end pages. Includes a clear 'Do not use' list.

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