get my anime list

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

Annotations handle safety constraints like readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotency. The description adds critical behavioral context by defining the required iterative workflow for full data retrieval, thereby significantly enhancing utility without contradicting the annotations.

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 two sentences are perfectly structured, with the first defining the core function and the second detailing the critical operational behavior (pagination). Every part of the definition is necessary and efficient.

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 lack of an output schema, the description is highly complete. It not only tells the agent what data it will receive but also how to manage the entire dataset using the pagination mechanism.

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 0%, requiring the description to carry the weight. It specifies the high-value data fields returned (status, score, episodes, genres), which informs the agent about the semantics of the data retrieved via the parameters, meeting the minimum viable standard for low coverage.

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 explicitly states the function (Read one page of the owner anime library), the specific data contained (status, score, episodes, genres, and notes), and distinguishes this list retrieval from detailed lookup tools like get_anime_details.

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 provides a complete operational guideline by instructing the agent to follow the pagination mechanism ('Follow pageInfo.hasNextPage until false'). This defines the intended usage pattern for comprehensive library analysis, which is crucial for an iterative list-fetching tool.

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