get_library

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating what is returned (metadata, documents). It does not elaborate on pagination, permissions, or output format specifics.

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 directly states the purpose. It is front-loaded and concise, though could be structured into bullet points for easier scanning.

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 read-only tool with strong annotations, the description provides basic completeness by mentioning returned data (metadata, documents). However, it lacks details on response format, document list size limits, or filtering possibilities.

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?

The input schema already describes both parameters adequately (library_id as 'Library identifier' and response_format with enum/default). The tool's description does not add further meaning or clarification beyond the schema.

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' and resource 'library', specifying it includes 'metadata and list of documents'. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling 'get_libraries' and other mutation tools.

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 retrieving library details but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like 'get_libraries' for listing, or any exclusions.

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