save_articleAuthenticated smry product action. Extract a public URL and idempotently save it to the user's reading library for later reading, search, and organization.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The public http or https article or YouTube URL to read. | |
| tags | No | ||
| status | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only status, destructiveness, and idempotency. The description adds useful context beyond that by noting the action requires authentication and that the URL must be public. It also frames the save as targeting the user's own library.
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 one concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates action, authentication, idempotency, and purpose efficiently.
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?
Annotations cover idempotency and non-destructiveness, and the description adds auth and public-URL constraints. However, optional parameter semantics (tags/status) remain unexplained and no routing guidance relative to siblings is present, leaving the definition adequate but not fully 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?
Schema description coverage is only 33%, and the description only reinforces the URL parameter's 'public' nature. The optional tags and status parameters are not semantically explained in either the schema or description, so the agent must infer their meaning from names and enums alone.
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 states a clear action: save a public URL to the user's reading library. It adds downstream purposes (reading, search, organization) and mentions idempotency. It does not explicitly differentiate from update_library_item, but the name/title and core action are clear enough.
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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as update_library_item for modifying existing items. 'Authenticated smry product action' gives context but no exclusions or comparison to siblings.
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 largely distinct job: discovery (search_feeds, search_web), content retrieval/search within URLs (get_article, search_article), and library/feed management (save_article, follow_feeds, update_library_item, create_monitor). The only mild overlap is get_article vs open_web_pages, both of which extract content from public URLs, but their different output styles and intended use cases keep them mostly separate.
All nine tool names follow a consistent imperative verb + object pattern in snake_case: create_monitor, follow_feeds, get_article, open_web_pages, save_article, search_article, search_feeds, search_web, update_library_item. There are no mixed conventions, vague verbs, or surprising abbreviations.
Nine tools is well-scoped for a reading and summarization product: three search/discovery tools, three content-retrieval tools, and three library/feed management tools. Each tool contributes a distinct workflow step and the set avoids bloat.
The set covers discovery, fetching and searching content, saving to a library, following feeds, monitoring page changes, and updating library items. However, there are no removal operations (unfollow feed, delete monitor, delete library item) and no direct way to list or read the user's saved library or followed sources, creating noticeable lifecycle gaps.