Get item chapters

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description only adds that output includes start/end times in seconds. It does not disclose return format (e.g., whether empty list is possible), pagination, or any rate limits, missing an opportunity to add value beyond the annotation.

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 two sentences, each adding useful information. The key purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides necessary context for tool differentiation.

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 low complexity, full schema coverage, and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It explains tool separation but lacks details on return values (though no output schema exists, the description could mention that it returns a chapter array). For a simple tool, this feels acceptable but not thorough.

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% and the parameter is simple. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate as baseline 3.

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 it returns chapter lists with timestamps for books, using the specific verb 'returns'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_library_item' by explaining why a separate tool exists for long audiobooks.

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 this is for books with chapters, not other library items, and notes it's separate from get_library_item. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for non-book items) or mention alternative tools like get_media_progress.

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