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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the article is 'public' (no auth needed) and specifies returned parts, but omits any rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted 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 single-parameter detail tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and input requirement. Sibling routing and edge cases remain unstated, but the output schema relieves the need to detail return values.

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 0% for the single url parameter, so the description must compensate. 'Provide its canonical HTTPS article URL' adds meaningful semantics: a full canonical web address is required, not an identifier or slug.

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 verb (Retrieve), resource (Sky Sports article), and enumerates returned fields (title, metadata, body paragraphs). This distinguishes it from sibling summary tools like skysports_headlines and skysports_news, which do not return body paragraphs.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the need for a canonical URL implies direct article resolution, but alternatives such as skysports_headlines are not mentioned. Usage is only implied from the detail-oriented resource.

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