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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: pagination behavior and the exact set of returned fields, which gives the agent 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then lists return fields. No wasted words or 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?

For a simple, read-only listing tool with documented parameters, the description covers the essential points: pagination, resource scope, and return fields. It does not mention sort order or total counts, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema.

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%, so page and limit are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds the 'paginated' framing but does not provide additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and names the exact resource ('articles from Anxiety in Teens'). It also specifies return fields (title, slug, summary, URL), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like get_article or search_articles.

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 phrase 'Paginated list' implies this is for browsing all articles, and the sibling 'search_articles' suggests an alternative, but the description does not explicitly state when to use list vs search or when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than clearly directed.

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