gbnews_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 a key limitation: only up to 24 recent stories are returned, and older ones are unavailable. It also lists the fields returned. It does not mention read-only status explicitly, but 'Get' implies it, and no side effects are relevant. This is strong for a simple read tool.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Get a GB News author profile') and then lists returned content and a limitation. No filler or redundancy; it is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: what is returned and the story limit. It could mention error handling or precedence when both parameters are supplied, but these are minor gaps given the tool's straightforward nature. Overall, it is sufficiently complete.

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%, so both url and slug are already documented. The description does not add additional meaning about how to use them, precedence, or format beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 a GB News author profile, listing the exact content returned (name, role, biography, image, recent stories). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like gbnews_article and other site-specific author tools, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies use for retrieving author profiles but does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or conditions for choosing a sibling tool. No explicit when/when-not guidance is given, though the purpose is self-evident.

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