get_article

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It states the output (full data) but does not mention side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. The read nature is implied but 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?

Description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys purpose without extraneous words. Every word 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 simple single-parameter schema and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality. However, it lacks note on authentication (implied by sibling tools) and potential limitations, but overall is sufficient for a straightforward 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?

The sole parameter 'tweet_link' has schema description coverage of 100%. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score is 3 due to high 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?

Description clearly states the action (Get full data) and the resource (X/Twitter Article), listing specific elements returned (text, title, author, metadata). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_tweet_info by focusing on long-form articles.

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 use when needing article details but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_tweet_info). No exclusion criteria or context is given.

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