get_articles_by_person

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the basic operation without any details about return format, potential limitations, ordering, pagination, or side effects. The agent is left without insight into what the tool actually returns or how it behaves beyond the minimal 'Get' action.

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 extremely concise, consisting of one clear sentence plus an argument definition. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no extraneous information, making it easy to parse and understand.

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 the lack of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the tool's behavior, such as return value structure, filtering semantics, or any limitations. It does not, leaving the description under-specified even for a simple tool. The agent has no information about what to expect from the response or when to opt for this tool over a sibling.

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 has 0% description coverage for its single parameter, so the description must compensate. It provides 'person: Name of the person', which clarifies the parameter's meaning, though it is largely a restatement of the parameter title. It offers minimal additional value but is enough for the simple, self-explanatory parameter.

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's function: 'Get articles mentioning a specific person.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('articles') with a clear filter condition (by person), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_articles_by_date. The purpose is unambiguous and directly aligned with the tool name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. It also does not reference sibling tools or suggest when another tool would be more appropriate, leaving the agent without clear direction.

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