Renew İTÜ Library Loan

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent write. The description adds the critical fact that the operation cannot succeed at all, and specifically that confirm=true does not override this — real behavioral context beyond the annotations. It stops short of saying what error or response is returned.

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?

Two short sentences, deprecation status front-loaded, no filler. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the single decisive fact — the tool is dead regardless of parameters — is present. The only missing piece is guidance on where to send the user instead.

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% for two parameters. The description explains that confirm=true has no effect, partially compensating for the undocumented confirm field, but says nothing about loan_id format or source.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource (library loan renewal) and immediately flags its legacy/deprecated status, which distinguishes it from the live library siblings like library_list_loans and library_reserve_item. It is clear what the tool was meant to do, though it never states what a renewal would entail.

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?

Gives unambiguous negative guidance: do not use, the tool is unavailable on the current Sirsi platform. It does not, however, name an alternative path for renewal (manual portal, another tool), so the agent is left without a redirect.

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