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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the read-only listing behavior but does not disclose ordering, default limit, or pagination behavior. This is acceptable for a simple list tool, but no additional behavioral context is provided beyond what annotations and the schema already imply.

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 concise sentence that directly names the operation and resource. It contains no filler or redundant phrasing, and it is front-loaded with the key action 'Lista los artículos'.

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 endpoint with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It tells the agent what the tool returns (articles of a category) and the annotations cover safety. Minor missing context such as result ordering or default pagination does not prevent correct 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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both 'slug' and 'limit' with types, constraints, and descriptions. The tool description does not add extra meaning about the parameters, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Lista los artículos de una categoría del blog.' This distinguishes it from single-post retrieval like get_post and from latest-posts listing like get_latest_posts. It does not explicitly contrast itself with search_posts, but the category-scoped resource is 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 implies when to use this tool: when you need articles belonging to a category. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative tool to choose (e.g., search_posts for full-text search or get_latest_posts for recent posts). The context is clear but the exclusions are absent.

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