list_articles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It indicates a read-only listing operation by the verb 'list', which is clear. However, it does not mention pagination, default limit (despite the schema having it), or what fields are returned. It is not misleading but lacks depth.

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 with no wasted words, quickly conveying the tool's purpose. It is optimally concise and front-loaded.

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 full parameter documentation in the schema and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the core behavior and the primary filter. It would benefit from a mention of default limit or return format, but given the schema covers the limit parameter, this is a minor gap.

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 schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, including the status filter and limit default. The description only mentions the status filter as optional, which is already implied by the schema. It adds no meaningful detail beyond the structured parameter information.

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 uses the specific verb 'list' and names the resource 'articles for a site', with an optional filter by status, which clearly distinguishes it from related tools like get_article or create_article. The scope is unambiguous and immediately understandable.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving multiple articles for a site, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_article or other listing tools. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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