get_story

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states the return fields, which is helpful, but it does not mention what happens for missing or invalid IDs, nor any error behavior or response format. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, but additional context would improve 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, tightly written sentence that immediately conveys the action, resource, scope, and expected output fields. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields and input requirement. It is slightly incomplete in not addressing not-found or error cases, but overall it provides sufficient context for selection and invocation.

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% for the single parameter 'id', which is described as 'Hacker News story ID'. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond that, such as constraints on the value or formatting, so it does not exceed the baseline set by the schema.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('Hacker News story'), and scopes it by 'ID'. It also lists the returned fields (title, URL, score, text), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling list/search tools.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies that the tool should be used when a story ID is known, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus siblings like search or top_stories. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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