yahoo_tech_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by mentioning page-based pagination, the output fields, and that data is sourced from Yahoo Tech's server-rendered section pages. It does not discuss edge cases, invalid categories, rate limits, or pagination end behavior, so it is adequate but not rich.

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 short and front-loaded with the essential task in the first sentence. It does not waste words, though 'Yahoo Tech section story stream' and 'Yahoo Tech section's editorial story feed' are slightly redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately names the returned story fields: title, destination URL, category, and thumbnail image. With only two parameters and a simple feed task, the description provides enough context for an agent to call the tool correctly, though examples of valid category values would improve completeness.

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 covers both parameters fully: 'category' is described as a Yahoo Tech section and 'page' as a 1-based page number defaulting to 1. The description reinforces that 'category' selects a section feed and that pagination exists, but it does not add materially new parameter semantics or enumerate valid category values.

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 that the tool returns a Yahoo Tech section editorial story feed and enumerates the fields returned for each story. It is specific enough to differentiate from article-level or home-feed siblings, though it does not explicitly name a sibling to distinguish against.

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 makes the general use case clear: retrieving a Yahoo Tech category/section story feed. However, it does not explain when to prefer this over related siblings like yahoo_tech_home or yahoo_tech_article, nor does it state any exclusions or alternative tools.

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