get_library_metadata_by_id_grandparent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the endpoint path—it does not explain hierarchy traversal, return behavior, or any edge cases.

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 three short lines with no filler: a title, the endpoint, and the parameter definition. Every line earns its place, and the key information is 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?

For a simple one-parameter read operation with rich annotations and an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. It names the endpoint and documents the only parameter; however, it omits any note about the relationship to parent/child/grandchild metadata tools, which would round out the context.

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 must carry the parameter meaning. It does so by defining 'id' as 'The unique identifier of the item', which is more informative than the schema's bare title 'Id'. It is still terse and vague about what kind of item, but sufficient for a single-parameter tool.

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 the verb ('Get') and the resource ('Metadata Grandparent') and includes the concrete endpoint path 'GET /library/metadata/{id}/grandparent'. This is specific enough to identify the operation, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like get_library_metadata_by_id_parent or get_library_metadata_by_id_grandchildren.

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 provides no guidance about when to use this tool instead of related metadata hierarchy tools. It only restates the endpoint and parameter, leaving the selection decision entirely to the reader.

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