get_story

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description usefully adds that the payload is the story only and that comments require a separate call. It stops short of covering failure behavior for deleted or invalid ids, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Four short sentences with the core action first, then the when-to-use routing, then the scope boundary. No filler and no repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape needn't be explained, and the description correctly covers the single-item scope and the comments boundary. Only the error/invalid-id path is unaddressed, a minor omission for a one-parameter read.

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 single story_id parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate; it does so partly by framing the id as obtainable from list/search results or an item?id=N URL. It never states the id is an integer or that it must be a valid HN item id, so the semantics remain slightly loose.

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?

Specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one Hacker News story, job or poll by id', which also enumerates the item types covered. It cleanly distinguishes itself from get_discussion, which handles the comment side of the same item.

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?

Explicit trigger condition: use when an id is already known, with the three concrete sources (list_stories, search_stories, or a news.ycombinator.com/item?id=N URL). It also names the alternative to reach for comments (get_discussion), so nothing is left to inference.

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