Get article

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, etc. The description adds that the tool returns body_text and audio_url, which are specific to the article resource. No behavioral contradictions; the description aligns with 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of 13 words. Every word is relevant, with no filler or repetition. Highly efficient.

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?

The tool has low complexity (1 param, no output schema). The description mentions 'full record' but then specifies only two fields (body_text, audio_url), potentially misleading an agent about complete return value. Lacks details like response format or pagination, but the simplicity keeps it adequate.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter 'slug'. The description only mentions 'by slug' without explaining what a slug is (e.g., format, uniqueness). It adds minimal semantic value beyond the type definition.

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 the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'article', and specifies key return fields (body_text, audio_url). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_audio_url by indicating it returns the full record.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like digest or get_audio_url. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for selection.

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