Related BedrockNews stories for a given article — same section, ranked by editorial-mode match, plumb, source affinity, and recency.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The source story id | |
| limit | No | Max related stories (default 4, max 12) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read. The description adds valuable behavioral context: ranking by editorial-mode match, plumb, source affinity, and recency, which goes beyond annotations.
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?
Single sentence that is front-loaded and succinct. Every part adds value: scope, ranking factors, and purpose. No unnecessary words.
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 tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned (related stories) and how they are ranked. It covers the key aspects needed for invocation.
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 is 100% and schema descriptions are adequate. The description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond what is in the schema, but the context of ranking is helpful.
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 it retrieves related stories for a given article, specifying the scope (same section) and ranking criteria. It distinguishes well from siblings like get_article (single article) and list_stories (all stories).
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 when related stories are needed but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no when-not-to-use advice is provided.
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 serves a distinct purpose: retrieving articles, graphs, related stories, site info, categories, and listing stories. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_*, list_*), making the API predictable and easy to navigate.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for a specialized news analysis API. Not too few, not too many.
Covers core functionality (listing, retrieving, related stories, metadata). Minor gap: no full-text search, but title search suffices for many use cases.
