bookmark_article

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. While 'bookmark' implies a non-destructive save, the description does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing bookmarks), authentication needs, or rate limits. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name.

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 a single sentence (10 words) that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with no superfluous information. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple bookmarking tool with clear schema and an output schema (though not shown), the description is largely sufficient. The sibling tools provide context for differentiation. However, the lack of behavioral details slightly reduces completeness.

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?

All 4 parameters are documented in the input schema with clear descriptions (e.g., 'ISO 8601 date string' for published_date). The description adds no additional meaning; the schema already provides sufficient semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Bookmark an article for later reference' uses a specific verb ('bookmark') and resource ('article'), clearly stating the tool's action and distinguishing it from siblings like 'latest_news' or 'saved_articles' which have different purposes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'saved_articles' to retrieve bookmarks, or 'summarize_article' for a different action). The usage context is implied but not explicit.

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