list_books

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the return format (full catalog records with listed fields), parameter constraints (order values, limit range), and defaults. It does not explicitly state read-only status or error behavior, but the read-only nature is strongly implied by 'list', and the constraints add practical transparency.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then parameter details and output fields. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and output fields sufficiently. It lacks explicit error or pagination notes, but for a basic listing tool, the provided details are adequate for correct 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It explicitly defines 'order' (recent/oldest, default) and 'limit' (1-200, default 50), and 'folder_id' is implicitly clear from 'in one folder'. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though folder_id is not explicitly named.

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 books within a specific folder, using a precise verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_books (search) and get_book (single item), and the scope is unambiguous.

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 description implies usage for listing all books in a given folder but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like search_books or get_book. It does not mention exclusions or alternative conditions, so the agent must infer appropriate use.

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