kotaku_sections

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses the returned content (sections, sub-topics, RSS feed links) plus the key relationship to the headlines endpoint. It stops short of describing the response structure or any pagination/ordering behavior, but for a zero-parameter inventory endpoint the disclosed behavior is largely sufficient.

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 content is delivered in two sentences, with the core action and result stated up front before the itemized inventory. The enumeration is long but information-dense, and no sentence is wasted.

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 parameterless section inventory with no output schema, the description says what the agent gets, the literal contents of the inventory, and how the returned slugs relate to another tool. Nothing essential is missing for correct 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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description appropriately does not invent parameter details; it instead makes the no-input nature clear by describing exactly what the tool returns.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'Kotaku sections' and then enumerates the exact inventory returned (Entertainment sub-topics, Reviews, Culture sub-topics, Tips & Guides, Games, Deals). This makes the tool's function unmistakable and distinguishes it from sibling tools like kotaku_headlines, kotaku_news, kotaku_article, and kotaku_author.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent that 'Every slug is accepted by the headlines endpoint,' which is a direct statement of how the output should be used downstream. It also frames the tool as the section inventory source, implying it should be called when a list of sections/slugs is needed before querying headlines.

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