get_articles

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only restates the function. It doesn't mention pagination, default limits, or what 'saved' means, though the schema covers parameters. 'From the database' is a vague filler that adds no transparency.

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 concise sentence, but 'from the database' is unnecessary filler. It is brief, but not maximally informative; still, it earns a 4 for brevity.

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?

With 5 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior. It doesn't explain response format, default behavior, or which sibling tools to prefer. The schema helps, but the description lacks contextual 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?

The input schema provides thorough descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage), so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves saved articles with the verb 'get' and resource 'articles'. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like article_list or get_article, which likely have overlapping functionality.

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 like article_list, article_search, or get_article. The description lacks any contextual cues about typical use cases or scenarios.

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