HN Pulse

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

No behavioral annotations are provided (empty annotations object), so the description carries the full disclosure burden. The verb 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not confirm idempotency, mention rate limiting, authentication requirements, or caching behavior. It does not contradict any annotations, but adds minimal behavioral context beyond the operation name.

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 that communicates the core function without redundant phrases or repetition of the tool name. Every word serves the purpose of defining the scope (recently submitted stories) and resource (Hacker News).

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter, 100% schema coverage, output schema present), the description is minimally sufficient. It does not need to explain return values due to the output schema. However, with seven sibling tools available, the description could be more complete by clarifying the 'newness' concept versus other listings.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for its single parameter (count). The description does not mention the parameter or provide usage examples, but given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate—the schema sufficiently documents the parameter semantics without requiring redundant description text.

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 tool fetches (reads) the most recently submitted stories from Hacker News. The phrase 'most recently submitted' effectively distinguishes this from the sibling GetTopStories (which retrieves top-ranked stories) and from filtered endpoints like GetAskHn or GetJobListings. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from SearchStories or provide explicit comparative guidance.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., when to choose new stories over top stories, or when to use SearchStories instead). There are no stated prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions for use.

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