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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, but the description adds real freshness context ("Today's is updated live during the day") and explains that croatia_only removes the world section and its stories. That is useful behavioral detail beyond the structured hints.

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?

Purpose and content are front-loaded before the filtering rule and use cases, with no filler. The long parenthetical section list is slightly dense but pays for itself by describing the digest's structure.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, yet it still outlines the digest structure, freshness, the croatia_only effect, and appropriate use cases. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, and the description's "croatia_only=true leaves out the world section and its stories" largely restates the schema's own wording. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific artifact (Adios's written daily summary, "Pregled dana") and enumerates its contents: sections, day timeline, and linked stories. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_weekly_digest or get_latest_news purely from this text.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: "what happened today/yesterday," morning briefings, and recaps. It does not name an alternative for narrower needs (e.g., a single story via get_article), so it stops short of the when-not/alternative level.

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