List articles

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It discloses auto-pagination ('auto-paginates; nothing is hidden') and the output format ('shown as [type] on each line'), which is valuable. It doesn't cover auth or rate limits, but for a listing tool it is reasonably transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating scope, clarifying entity types, explaining output, and pointing to the sibling alternative. No wasted words.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description conveys what to expect: all articles, auto-pagination, and type shown per line. It could mention ordering or other return fields, but the absence is not critical for a list tool with good parameter schema coverage.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that every World Anvil entity is an article with a template type, which clarifies the 'type' parameter and its significance. It also reinforces the category and type filtering options beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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 'List ALL articles in a world' with a specific verb and resource scope, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly directing keyword lookups to search_articles and implying a comprehensive listing.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus search_articles: 'For keyword lookups prefer search_articles.' It also notes optional filters by category or template type, giving clear use cases.

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