get_libraries_by_id_series_by_series_id

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations by specifying the HTTP route, the presence of sort/filter/include controls, and the currently supported include value rssfeed.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and follows with a clear endpoint and labeled parameter list. Every line contributes useful information without unnecessary prose.

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 output schema covers return values and annotations cover safety, so the description only needs to clarify selection and parameters. It does that reasonably well, though it could improve by noting how it differs from the similar get_series_by_id and get_libraries_by_id_series tools.

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%, so the description carries the parameter documentation burden. It gives at least minimal meaning to all five parameters, especially include with its rssfeed option, though sort and filter remain somewhat vague.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get single series in library', and confirms it with the full endpoint path. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_libraries_by_id_series (list) and get_series_by_id (global series lookup).

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'in library' and the required id and series_id path parameters, but the description does not explicitly say when to choose this over get_series_by_id or get_libraries_by_id_series. No alternative-based guidance or exclusions are provided.

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