news_tech_pulse

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavioral traits: cost per call, caching (up to 2 minutes), single upstream call via Algolia HN API, and read-only operation. This is comprehensive and leaves no ambiguity.

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 (4 sentences) and front-loaded with cost and core action. Every sentence adds value: cost, action, return format, use cases, caching behavior. No fluff.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete. It details the return format (rank, story id, title, etc.), data source, caching, and cost. Even without a schema, an agent has enough to invoke and interpret results.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage. Since there are no parameters, the description cannot add parameter semantics. The description correctly implies no user input is needed, which aligns with the schema.

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 it gets the current Hacker News front page (30 stories) as normalized JSON, specifying the exact fields (rank, story id, title, etc.). This distinguishes it from all sibling tools which cover unrelated domains like crypto, weather, etc.

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?

Explicitly lists use cases: tech trend detection, topic monitoring, news agents, content-pipeline seeding. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the specific use cases sufficiently guide the agent. The cost warning ($0.005 per call) adds practical usage guidance.

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