irishtimes_article

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly notes that subscriber-only (premium) articles return a permission error instead of the body, while metered articles are returned in full. This is valuable context about access restrictions that an agent must know. Minor gaps (e.g., format of metadata, error handling for invalid URLs) remain, but the critical paywall behavior is transparently stated.

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 fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the paywall nuance is stated in the second sentence. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and edge cases.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema conversion, the description provides enough to call it correctly: input is a canonical URL, output includes metadata and body, and premium content will error. It could be more complete by describing the output fields or possible errors beyond the premium case, but nothing critical is missing for invocation.

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 already describes the only parameter (url) as 'Canonical Irish Times article URL', and the description adds no additional meaning beyond restating 'canonical article URL'. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; no extra parameter semantics are provided.

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 'Get Irish Times article content' and specifies it returns metadata and body paragraphs from a canonical article URL. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like irishtimes_headlines or irishtimes_news, which likely handle lists or summaries. The verb-resource pair is specific and 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 the tool is used when you have a canonical article URL, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. It neither names siblings nor provides exclusions, leaving the selection to inference from the URL parameter.

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