List VR.org original articles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context (newest first ordering, optional filtering) but does not disclose additional traits beyond the schema and annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded with the main action, no wasted words. Every sentence provides 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?

For a simple listing tool with 2 optional params and good annotations, the description covers what is returned (summaries), ordering, and optional filtering. No output schema needed. Complete for its complexity.

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 description coverage is 100% with both parameters well-described. The description adds 'Optionally filter by category' which mirrors the schema. With full schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate as description adds no extra meaning.

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 verb 'Returns', resource 'summaries of VR.org's own editorial articles', and specifies types of original content (reporting, opinion, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_vr_article' (full article) and 'search_vr_news' (general news). Also mentions ordering (newest first) and optional category filter.

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?

Description indicates optional category filter and ordering. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, the context of sibling tool names (e.g., 'search_vr_news', 'get_vr_article') provides clear differentiation. The description is adequate for guiding usage.

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