Search collections by title

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 goes further by disclosing the exact output shape ('one row per match: [id] title'), which is valuable because no output schema exists. It omits matching behavior details like case sensitivity or result limits.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and matching mode, then a compact output-format statement. The Args block is largely redundant given the single obvious parameter, but it is brief and causes little bloat.

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 responsibly covers the return format, and with one simple required parameter the input side needs little more. Missing case-sensitivity, empty-result behavior, and result-count limits are minor gaps for a simple lookup tool.

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 coverage is 0% and the Args line merely restates the parameter name ('The title to search for'), which is tautological. The body does contribute one real semantic detail — that matching is substring-based rather than exact — which compensates partially for the empty 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search for collections by title') and adds the matching mode ('substring match'), which meaningfully disambiguates it from list_all_collections and search_books_by_title. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_all_collections or search_books_by_title, and no preconditions are given. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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