get_articleFetch a single article from Anxiety 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 readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the data source scope ('from Anxiety in Children') and enumerating the returned parts (title, body, author, reviewer, citations, metadata), which helps set expectations beyond the annotation.
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 deliver all essential information: what the tool does, how the article is identified, and what the response contains. No filler or repetition; front-loaded with the verb and object.
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 simple one-parameter, read-only retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It states the precise lookup mechanism, the article source, and the expected return fields, giving an agent everything needed to invoke it confidently.
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 100% for the single slug parameter, so the schema already fully documents the parameter. The description adds no extra format, constraints, or behavioral details beyond saying the lookup is by slug, which keeps the score at baseline.
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 clearly states the action ('Fetch'), the exact resource ('a single article from Anxiety in Children'), the identifier ('by slug'), and the returned content fields. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_articles or search_articles, which handle broader retrieval operations.
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 description implies usage: use this when you have a known slug and need a single full article. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use search_articles to find an article'), but the context is clear enough for basic selection.
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 clear, distinct purpose: fetching a single article, listing articles, searching articles, citing, crisis resources, and site info. No two tools could be easily confused, even list and search are differentiated by query vs. pagination.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (cite_article, get_article, list_articles, search_articles, etc.). The convention is uniform and predictable.
With 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for an article library, covering reading, searching, listing, citing, plus crisis and site info. No redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers the core library workflow: discover (list/search), access (get), cite, and contextual info (microsite). The inclusion of crisis resources is a thoughtful addition for the domain. No obvious gaps for a read-only content library.