APIbase

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses return payload structure (biography, dates, photo, Wikipedia link) and data source (Open Library / Internet Archive), but lacks operational details like rate limits, caching behavior, or error conditions.

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 dense sentence with no waste. Front-loaded action ('Get author profile...') followed by em-dash delineation of return fields. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, but description compensates by listing key return fields (biography, dates, photo, link). For a single-parameter lookup tool, this is sufficiently complete, though annotations would strengthen operational context.

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 has 100% description coverage with example and sourcing guidance ('Get from search or work author keys'). Description reinforces the parameter purpose but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Specific verb (Get) + resource (author profile) + scope (by Open Library Author ID). Clearly distinguishes from siblings books.works.details (works vs authors) and books.editions.isbn (editions vs authors).

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?

Implies usage context by requiring an Open Library Author ID, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance contrasting with books.works.details or books.catalog.search. No prerequisites or alternative recommendations stated.

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