get_libraries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds context about filtering but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or return format beyond what annotations provide.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and contains no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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 list tool with 2 parameters (none required), rich annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main operation and filter option. However, it could mention the return format (list) and that the response_format parameter exists, though the schema provides enums.

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 50%; the 'type' parameter is described in the schema as 'Filter by library type' and the description reinforces that. However, the 'response_format' parameter lacks a schema description and the description does not mention it, leaving half of the parameters with no added meaning.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'libraries', and scope 'for the authenticated user' with optional filter by type, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_library' which retrieves a single library.

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 implies usage for listing libraries with optional filtering but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_library' for single library retrieval or 'search' for broader queries. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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