slate_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 states that the tool does not log in, use cookies, or bypass challenges, and that is_paywalled indicates subscription gating. This reveals important limitations and response characteristics beyond the obvious, though it doesn't address error handling or rate limits.

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 three concise sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose ('Slate article content'), then details the return value and key behavioral caveats. Every sentence contributes to the agent's understanding, making it well-structured and efficient.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned (metadata, body paragraphs) and mentions an important output field (is_paywalled). It doesn't detail the full return structure or error behaviors, but given the tool's simplicity and the lack of output schema, it is reasonably 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?

The schema already describes the URL parameter fully (100% coverage), but the description adds the nuance that the URL must be a 'canonical dated' Slate URL, which is not in the schema description. This extra detail about URL format goes beyond the schema's basic description, so it adds meaningful value.

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 retrieves Slate article content (metadata and body paragraphs) from a canonical dated URL. It specifies the resource (Slate articles) and the action (returns content), distinguishing it from other article tools by source and purpose. It is not a tautology and provides concrete return details.

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 usage when a user has a Slate article URL but does not explicitly compare to alternative tools like slate_headlines or slate_categories. It lacks when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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