get_similar_articles

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, but it only says 'Get articles similar to the provided text.' It does not explain how similarity is determined, what happens with empty results, or any limits. The 'Get' verb implies read-only behavior, but that is not explicit.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and the Args section is minimal. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the Args line largely repeats the schema, the overall size is appropriate.

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?

The tool has a simple interface with one string parameter, and the description covers the core functionality. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks information about result format, limitations, or behavior on edge cases, making it only minimally complete.

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 only labels the parameter as 'Text', while the description adds 'Text to find similar articles for', clarifying the role of the input. For a single parameter, this is sufficient semantic context, especially given the 0% schema description coverage.

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 gets articles similar to a provided text, using the verb 'Get' plus a specific resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_articles_by_date and get_articles_by_person by focusing on similarity to arbitrary text.

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 about when to use this tool instead of siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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