get_raindrops

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It makes the read-only retrieval intent clear through 'Get' and adds useful collectionId semantics (0=all, -1=unsorted, -99=trash). It does not mention pagination behavior, response shape, or authentication expectations, which keeps this at a minimally viable level.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence immediately conveys purpose, and the second highlights the most important scoping values for collectionId. It is well structured and front-loaded.

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?

The schema fully documents invocation details, and the description supplies purpose and collection scope. The lack of an output schema and explicit sibling alternatives means the agent must infer response shape and tool-selection boundaries, but this is still complete enough for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already documents all six parameters with defaults, constraints, and descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the collectionId sentinel values but does not add meaning beyond what the input schema already provides.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Get bookmarks from a collection' with 'optional search and filtering.' The plural 'bookmarks' combined with collection scope distinguishes it clearly from get_raindrop (single bookmark) and get_collection (collection metadata).

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 for retrieving bookmarks from a specific or special collection, optionally filtered by search. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this over get_raindrop or other sibling tools, so the routing guidance is inferred rather than declared.

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