get_libraries_by_id_personalized

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds only the HTTP method and path, not behavioral context such as auth requirements, scoping, or return behavior. It does not contradict 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 description is compact and front-loaded, with the endpoint immediately after the one-line summary and no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool, even though the summary phrase 'Get libraries personalized' is awkwardly worded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are mostly covered, and annotations provide the safety context. However, the meaning of 'personalized' is never explained and there is no indication of when this endpoint is the right choice among numerous get_libraries_by_id_* siblings, leaving a meaningful gap.

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%, but the description identifies the sole parameter 'id' as a path parameter, which adds placement information beyond the schema. It does not explain what the id refers to or any format constraints, though the tool and path names imply it is the library id.

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 the verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as libraries with an id, and the HTTP endpoint adds the exact route. However, 'personalized' is left undefined, so the agent cannot tell what this variant actually returns or how it differs from get_libraries_by_id and the many other get_libraries_by_id_* siblings.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like get_libraries_by_id or get_libraries_by_id_items. The only signal is the endpoint suffix 'personalized', which the agent would have to infer without support.

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