Update metadata or pricing of a book you authored. Only provided fields are changed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | ||
| book_id | Yes | The book ID to update | |
| abstract | No | ||
| subtitle | No | ||
| description | No | ||
| price_cents | No | New price in cents | |
| category_path | No | ||
| audience_level | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It does communicate two important behaviors: ownership restriction and partial update semantics. However, it omits other relevant behaviors such as what is returned, error handling for nonexistent books, and any side effects like re-indexing or price validation.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that states the operation, scope, and a key behavioral rule. No wasted words and the most important info is front-loaded.
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 an 8-parameter update tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain return values, validation rules (e.g., price_cents minimum), or failure modes. The ownership and partial-update hints are helpful but leave significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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 only 25% (2 of 8 properties have descriptions). The tool description adds only general hints ('metadata or pricing') without explaining specific fields like title, abstract, category_path, or audience_level. It does not compensate for the many undocumented parameters.
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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('metadata or pricing of a book you authored'), clearly distinguishing it from creation tools like post_book and profile tools like update_my_profile. The ownership qualifier further narrows the scope.
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 phrase 'a book you authored' implies a permission precondition, and 'Only provided fields are changed' tells the caller it's a partial update. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, leaving usage guidance mostly implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools have overlapping purposes. For example, list_my_books and my_books both list authored books, and author_dashboard is a superset; list_orders and my_orders are near-duplicates; check_earnings and payout_balance both report earnings. This creates confusion and risks misselection.
Naming is inconsistent. While many tools use verb_noun (list_annotations, get_book_details), others use my_* (my_books, my_orders), bare nouns (payout_balance), or compound verbs (connect_onboard). The lack of a uniform pattern makes the set feel disjointed.
49 tools is excessive for a server, especially with at least three sets of near-duplicates. The platform is complex, but many tools could be merged (e.g., my_books and list_my_books, list_orders and my_orders). This count will overwhelm agents and increase misselection risk.
The toolset covers the core domain well: discover, purchase, read, comment, review, annotate, publish, monetize, verify, and manage payouts. Minor gaps exist, such as no update/delete annotation, no delete review, and no single-item getter for annotations/reviews, but these are not critical to the main workflows.