Get library

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns 'folders and scanner settings', which is useful but does not go beyond what annotations already provide in terms of safety profile.

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 a single efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action and resource. Slightly more detail could be beneficial, but it earns its place.

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 low complexity (2 params, one required), the simple schema with no nested objects, and no output schema needed, the description is complete enough. The agent can infer the return value from the name and description.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetches') and resource ('a single library including its folders and scanner settings'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_libraries (which lists all libraries) and get_library_stats (which returns statistics).

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 context (fetching a single library by ID), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_library_item, get_library_filter_data, or other read tools. The sibling list is large but no when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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