This is a bad way to go about it. You want to consume more material, and you want each piece of it to have the least impact on your vocabulary.

So maybe looking for high frequency words is good, but only high frequency words that you know. So the most coverage of the most high frequency words would be very bad. To get the most coverage of the most high frequency words, they'd have to be used in a lower frequency than they are normally, with less repetition in natural contexts, which enable the learner to build meaning. Unless the books were longer which makes degenerate the concept of concentrating common vocabulary in very few books (just read two 2000 page books!)

Reading a bunch of stuff with a concentrated dose of tons of words you don't know will leave you with absolutely no retention. If you know every word but one in e.g. a chapter, you'll probably remember that word forever. The concept is called comprehensible input - you set unfamiliar things in a background of familiar things.

If you want a book with the most unfamiliar vocabulary, it's called a dictionary. It contains all of the most commonly used words, and the least commonly used, too.

In fact, maybe this makes sense if you're going to be locked in a cell for 10 years, you want to learn a language starting from zero*, and only get to have a pocket dictionary and two other books (with a size limit.) You might want to have sample natural sentences for as many of the best words to know as you could.

The real algorithmic language learning trick is to write books that are interesting that use the fewest words (which would inevitably be the most important words to use to communicate but not the necessarily the most common words that natives use to communicate), and introduce new, useful words at a steady rate. That seems like how Capretz put together French in Action. It's also graded readers: I still remember the moment I realized that I could not only understand what was happening in the basic graded reader I'd accidentally picked up on a whim, but also I was interested in finding out what was going to happen next. It's been downhill from there.

-----

[*] or maybe from one? You would have to have some familiarity with the script, and it had better be a phonetic one. Otherwise, this would be just learning how to read a language. No English, no French, no Portuguese, no Chinese... although having poetry books might help, because you can be surer of vowel similarities and syllable breaks. Poetry books are not dense, however, and might bump against any size limit. And the vocabulary would be weird and not representative.