punch_headlines

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 states that the tool returns 'fresh headlines,' confirming a read-only, list-style result, but it does not describe the output format, whether headlines include URLs or dates, pagination behavior, or any rate limits or caching semantics.

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 two short sentences with no filler or repetition. The core action and scope are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds the useful detail that results are 'fresh' and limited to one topic page.

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 single-parameter tool with a fully enumerated schema, the description is adequate for basic invocation. However, with no output schema and no annotations, an agent is left guessing about the precise shape of the returned headlines, and the notion of 'fresh' is undefined, so the description is not fully self-sufficient.

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% for the single 'section' parameter, which already documents it as a 'Punch topic slug' with a full enum. The description adds only the contextual hint that headlines come from 'one Punch topic page,' which maps directly to the parameter but provides no additional format or selection details.

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 and resource: 'Get Punch section headlines,' which clearly indicates it retrieves headlines rather than articles or section metadata. The phrase 'from one Punch topic page' adds scope, distinguishing it from siblings like punch_article and punch_sections, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied: call this tool when you want headlines from a specific Punch section or topic page. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over related tools like punch_news, punch_sections, or punch_article, so an agent must infer the right choice from the description alone.

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