mashable_author

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and it does well by revealing the pagination nuance ('Profile fields are only present on page 1') and the one-page article limit. It does not discuss error/empty cases or identification requirements, but for a public read-only profile tool the disclosed behavior is solid.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the first sentence identifies the tool, the second defines the return payload, and the third adds the critical pagination caveat. It is front-loaded and every sentence contributes.

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 read-only profile tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the return value and the key page-dependent behavior. It does not explicitly state that at least one of slug/url is needed or what happens on a bad author slug, but the schema's parameter descriptions largely fill that gap.

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 the baseline is 3, and the description adds extra meaning by tying the page parameter to the profile-fields caveat and to the one-page article result. The schema already documents slug and URL alternatives, so no duplication is needed.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get a Mashable author profile') and enumerates the returned content, so an agent knows this is an author-profile fetch rather than an article or section tool. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool to distinguish against, but the 'Mashable author profile' scope is unambiguous enough.

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 when to use it: whenever a Mashable author profile plus one page of their articles is needed. It provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, relying on the resource name and return description to cue selection.

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