reading_find_passage

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true. The description goes beyond by revealing normalization behavior and the capped, truncated context-chunk return. It does not discuss rate limits or failure behavior, but these are secondary for a read-only lookup.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the action and includes only high-value details: normalization and context-chunk count. No filler or repetition of the tool name/title.

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 5-param tool with no output schema and no param descriptions, the description conveys the core behavior and a rough idea of the response (up to three truncated chunks) but omits meaning of limit, bookId, maxContextChars, and any defaults. It gives enough for a simple quote lookup but not enough to confidently invoke all capabilities.

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 has zero description coverage across 5 params, and description only implicitly addresses quote and contextChunkLimit/maxContextChars via 'short quote', 'up to three', and 'truncated'. bookId, limit, and maxContextChars semantics are not explained, so the description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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?

States a specific verb (Find) and resource (short quote/line across book text), and adds the distinguishing detail of punctuation/spacing normalization. This differentiates it from sibling search/list tools even without explicit comparisons. The output of neighboring chunks is also specified, so an agent can anticipate the result.

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?

No explicit when/when-not with alternatives, but the description gives clear context: use when you have a short quote whose exact punctuation/spacing may differ. It does not mention reading_search_chunks or when to use that instead, so it stops short of full guidance.

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