get_articleFetch a single article from ADHD in Children by slug. Returns title, body content, author, clinical reviewer, citations, and metadata.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Article slug. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation readOnlyHint already declares the safe read nature, and the description adds value by listing the returned fields (title, body, author, citations, metadata) and the source domain. No contradictions.
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 concise, front-loaded sentences cover the action, source, input, and output. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description fully covers purpose, input requirement, and return content. No gaps remain for effective use.
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 for the slug parameter is 100% with the description 'Article slug.' The description merely repeats 'by slug' without adding deeper semantic meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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?
Clearly states the specific action 'Fetch a single article from ADHD in Children by slug' and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_articles and search_articles by emphasizing 'single' and 'by slug'.
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?
Usage is implied—use when you have a slug to fetch one article—but no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it is provided. Sibling tools exist but are not mentioned.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: citation, retrieval, crisis resources, site info, listing, and search. There is no overlapping functionality; an agent can easily select the appropriate tool for the task.
All tool names follow a consistent lowercase verb_noun pattern (cite_article, get_article, list_articles, search_articles, get_crisis_resources, get_microsite_info). This uniformity makes the toolset predictable and easy to navigate.
With only 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for a content library. Each tool serves a necessary function without redundancy, keeping the surface area manageable for agents.
The set covers the full read-only lifecycle of the article library: listing, searching, fetching, and citing. Including crisis resources and site information rounds out the server's purpose without missing any obvious operations for the intended domain.