extract_key_facts

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds minimal behavioral info: 'returns a dictionary containing a list of facts.' No details on pagination, limits, or error handling.

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?

Two concise sentences, no superfluous content. Front-loaded with purpose; every sentence adds value.

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 existence of an output schema, return documentation is less critical. However, the description lacks usage guidelines and parameter details, making it incomplete for an agent to decide when and how to use this tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters. It implicitly connects 'topic' to topic_within_article and count may be inferred, but does not clarify the range or behavior of count, nor the format of topic_within_article.

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 action (extract key facts) and the resource (Wikipedia article), with an optional topic focus. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_summary by specifying 'key facts' and the return type, though it does not explicitly contrast with similar 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_summary or summarize_article_for_query. The description only mentions optional topic focus, but lacks context for selection.

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