france24_author

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that this is a read-only profile lookup returning public data, specifies the input must be a canonical author URL, and proactively warns that the shared 'FRANCE 24' newsroom byline has no individual biography. It does not cover pagination or error behavior, but for a simple one-parameter lookup this is adequate.

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 sentences with no filler. The core action and return payload are front-loaded, and the useful shared-byline caveat is appended without bloating the description.

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 low-complexity tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the call returns and the special shared-byline case. It could mention pagination or behavior for invalid URLs, but nothing essential for selecting and invoking the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents the 'url' parameter as a canonical www.france24.com/en/author/<slug>/ URL. The description reinforces that the URL should be canonical but adds little semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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-resource pair: 'Get a France 24 author profile.' It clearly states what is returned (name, job title, biography, recent articles) and distinguishes the tool from france24_article, france24_headlines, and the many other author tools by naming the exact resource scope.

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 opening line establishes a clear use case: retrieve a France 24 author profile and recent articles from a canonical author-profile URL. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is unambiguous enough that an agent knows when to select it over sibling news and article tools.

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