Recently read books

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return shape per row ('[id] title by author' plus a progress summary) and the exact sort key, which annotations cannot express.

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?

Purpose and ordering come first, the output format follows, and the two parameters are listed compactly. Every sentence carries information with no padding or repetition of the 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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by describing the per-row format and progress summary, and it documents both parameters. It lacks interaction notes (e.g., behavior when offset exceeds results or how progress is computed), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 parameters, and it does: limit is documented with its 1-500 range and default of 10, and offset is identified as the paging offset. The offset explanation ('Books to skip, for paging') is thin and omits its default, keeping this under a 5.

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 and resource ('Get the most recently read books') and pins down the ordering rule (last opened or read, whichever is later), which separates it from siblings like get_books_in_progress or get_finished_books. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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 sort semantics imply when this tool is appropriate (surfacing recent activity), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_all_books or get_books_in_progress. Usage is inferable but not directed.

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