latest_articlesList newly published art and illustration research with summaries, publication dates, canonical pages, and structured API URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the output fields (summaries, publication dates, canonical pages, structured API URLs). It does not mention ordering or pagination behavior, but 'newly published' conveys the ordering intent.
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 with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then lists return fields efficiently. Every word contributes useful information.
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 with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, temporal scoping, and return payload. Combined with the schema's limit constraints and the annotations, an agent has enough to call the tool correctly. Minor gaps are the lack of explicit sibling differentiation and pagination/ordering details, but these are not critical here.
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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all. The schema provides the property name plus min/max bounds, but the description adds no meaning beyond that. For a low-coverage schema, the description should compensate, and it does not.
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 a distinct resource: newly published art and illustration research. It also enumerates what is returned (summaries, publication dates, canonical pages, structured API URLs), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_articles and get_article.
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 'newly published' implies a recency-based use case, and the tool's name 'latest_articles' reinforces this. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_articles or articles_by_category, nor any exclusions or sibling references.
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 clearly distinct purpose: category browsing, article detail retrieval, latest article listing, search, and commission quote preparation. Even among the article tools, the retrieval modes are distinct enough that an agent would not easily confuse them.
Most tool names follow a readable pattern with 'articles' as a common noun and verbs like get, search, and prepare. Names like latest_articles and articles_by_category break the strict verb_noun convention, but the overall pattern remains predictable.
Five tools is a well-scoped size for a server that combines article research with commission quote preparation. Each tool covers a distinct need and none feel redundant or unnecessary.
Article discovery is well covered with search, category, latest, and detail retrieval, and the quote tool handles validation and endpoint preparation. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit category listing endpoint and no follow-up execution/payment tool, but agents can work around these.