hookmark_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the tool returns one item per line in specified formats, accepts various input types (file path, URL, hook:// URL), and can list all bookmarks if no item is provided. However, it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs, which are not covered.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by format details and usage notes. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is fairly complete for a read-only list tool. It covers input types, format options, and a special case (no item). However, it could improve by mentioning potential outputs or error scenarios, but the lack of output schema is compensated by format explanations.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, such as clarifying that omitting 'item' lists all bookmarks and briefly explaining format options, but does not provide significant additional semantics.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('items hooked to a given file or URL'), specifying it returns one item per line. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on listing hooks rather than cloning, connecting, linking, removing, or searching, which are different operations.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('List all items hooked to a given file or URL') and provides alternatives for different formats. It also clarifies usage without an item to list all bookmarks, offering clear context for when to omit parameters.

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