zdnet_author

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it returns a profile and one page of articles, without mentioning any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior when the author is not found. The description adds minimal value beyond the basic purpose.

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 concise (two sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence earns its place. It efficiently conveys the tool's function and the returned data without redundant information.

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 retrieval tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main return fields and mentions pagination implicitly. However, it does not explain how to choose between url and slug (though the schema does), nor does it mention error conditions or additional pagination options beyond 'one page'. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema covers all three parameters (url, page, slug) with descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds little beyond what the schema already says, such as implying that 'page' controls pagination, but it does not clarify precedence between url and slug beyond the schema's note. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get a ZDNet author profile' and enumerates exactly what is returned (name, role, biography, education, areas of expertise, join date, article count, and one page of recent articles). This distinguishes it from sibling author tools for other sites and from article retrieval 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 implies usage for retrieving a ZDNet author's public profile, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or mention when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool names are provided, so the agent must infer from context that this is the ZDNet-specific author tool.

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