sun_author

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavior burden. It discloses the required input type ('canonical author URL') and the output categories, but it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, whether it scrapes live page data, or how non-canonical URLs are handled. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that names the action, the resource, and the return payload without filler. Every clause adds useful information, and there is no redundant or promotional language.

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 low-complexity, single-parameter read tool, the description covers the core scenario and tells the agent what to expect: byline metadata, biography, and recent articles. It omits output formatting and pagination details, but those are minor gaps given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool.

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 only parameter, 'url', is already fully described in the schema as 'Canonical The Sun author URL', and schema coverage is 100%. The description repeats the canonical-URL notion but adds no additional formatting, validation, or source-location guidance, so it stays at the schema-covered baseline.

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 names a specific resource ('Sun author profile') with a clear verb ('Get') and enumerates the returned content: byline metadata, biography, and recent articles. This lets an agent distinguish it from sun_article, sun_headlines, and related publication-level tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling author tools.

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 clearly implies the core use case: retrieving a Sun author profile from a canonical author URL. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or when an alternative such as sun_article, sun_headlines, or another publisher's author tool would be more appropriate.

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