bookstack_chapters_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 that results are limited to 'visible to the authenticated user' (permissions context) and mentions pagination behavior. However, it doesn't describe rate limits, error conditions, response format, or whether this is a read-only operation (though 'List' implies it).

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the core purpose and key behavioral aspects. The second sentence provides essential domain context ('Chapters are organizational containers within books') that helps the agent understand the resource hierarchy.

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?

For a list tool with 4 parameters, 100% schema coverage, but no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps. It covers the basic purpose and scope but doesn't address response format, error handling, or detailed behavioral constraints that would be helpful for an agent.

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 fully documents all 4 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'pagination and filtering options' generically, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter usage or interactions.

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 specific action ('List all chapters'), specifies the resource ('chapters'), and provides scope details ('visible to the authenticated user with pagination and filtering options'). It distinguishes from siblings like bookstack_chapters_read (which reads a single chapter) and bookstack_chapters_create/delete/update (which are mutation 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?

The description implies usage context through 'visible to the authenticated user' and mentions pagination/filtering capabilities, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like bookstack_search or bookstack_books_list. No explicit exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools are provided.

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