remove_book_from_library

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

Despite annotations already declaring destructive and idempotent hints, the description adds critical context: 'all shelves', no-op behavior, permanent removal, and required SANSFICTION_TOKEN. This exceeds annotation coverage.

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?

Three focused sentences: action, idempotency, when-to-use, alternative, and auth. No fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 a single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description provides complete context: effect, idempotency, usage boundary, and authentication requirement. Nothing critical is missing.

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 100% and the single parameter book_id is fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline for full coverage.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Remove' with resource 'book from the user's library' and clarifies scope 'entirely (all shelves)'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling update_library_book by contrasting removal vs. shelf change.

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?

Explicit 'When to use' clause and direct alternative guidance: 'If you only want to change its shelf... use update_library_book instead'. Also warns against remove-and-re-add anti-pattern.

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