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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: results are paginated and include title, slug, summary, and URL. However, it doesn't disclose additional traits such as default pagination limits, ordering, or potential performance considerations, though the schema does document limits.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the purpose, source, and return fields. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only list operation with two fully documented optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers source, pagination, and return fields. It could mention ordering or default limit behavior, but the schema already supplies defaults, so the description is reasonably complete.

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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both page (1-indexed) and limit (default 30, max 100). The description only adds the word 'paginated', which is already evident from the parameters, providing no additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'articles from Psychiatry for Children', and scope as a paginated list with specific return fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_article (single item) and search_articles (search).

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 use for browsing or retrieving all articles in a paginated manner, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like search_articles or get_article. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given.

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