reading_import_finish

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation is a mutating finalization that adds a book to the library, but it does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, what state the import must be in, whether it is irreversible, or what happens if called prematurely. This leaves the agent to infer key side effects for a write operation.

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 definition is a single sentence with the key verb 'Finish' front-loaded, no filler, no repetition of schema or annotations. Every part contributes purpose and outcome.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action and effect. It is incomplete, though, in the context of the multi-step import workflow: it omits the required prior state (all chunks uploaded after reading_import_part) and any indication of success/failure behavior, which an agent needs to call it correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to explain uploadId but never mentions the parameter by name. The phrase 'uploaded EPUB/TXT' weakly implies uploadId is the identifier of a previously started upload, but it does not state where that ID comes from (e.g., reading_import_begin) or what value is valid.

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?

Description opens with 'Finish a chunked import,' a specific verb and resource that clearly marks it as the completion step for the chunked-upload family (begin/part/cancel/finish). The added effect, 'add the uploaded EPUB/TXT to the reading library,' distinguishes its outcome from reading_import_cancel and other 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?

The phrase 'Finish a chunked import' implies it should be used after reading_import_begin and reading_import_part, and it is implicitly the counterpart to reading_import_cancel. However, it never explicitly states this precondition, tells the agent not to call it before all chunks are uploaded, or contrasts with cancel.

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