get_pulse_narrative

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

The description discloses the cost ($0.01), payment method (USDC on Base via x402), error policy (never charged for an error), and behavior without a key (returns 402 price terms). This is rich behavioral disclosure beyond what annotations provide (none).

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 three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the key paid nature, then describes the return content, and finishes with setup instructions. Every sentence 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the return content (content items and source attribution) and covers payment/error scenarios, making it complete for a single-parameter tool. The combination of purpose, usage, and transparency is sufficient for correct 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?

The schema covers the single parameter 'id' with 100% coverage, describing it as 'Narrative id (from get_pulse_narratives)'. The description doesn't add parameter-specific details beyond referring to 'one narrative', so it meets the baseline without adding extra value.

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 returns detail for a single narrative, including content items and source attribution. The verb 'Detail' and the qualifier 'one narrative' make the purpose specific and distinguish it from listing siblings like get_pulse_narratives.

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 provides clear usage context: set PRIVATE_KEY to pay via x402 on a live API, and without a key the call returns 402 price terms. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the 'one narrative' scope implies it's for fetching details for a specific narrative, and the schema references get_pulse_narratives for the id.

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