GetPublications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation (fetching) and mentions sorting, but fails to disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. The behavioral description is minimal.

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?

Single sentence with no fluff. Front-loaded with the key purpose and includes sorting detail. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

The description covers the core function adequately given that parameters are fully documented in the schema. However, it could mention the optional filtering by publicationTypes and accountId, and explain the ordering more explicitly. Still, it is sufficient for an agent to understand the basic operation.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema; it only restates the sorting behavior. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds no additional value over 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Fetch', resource 'publication history', scope 'for an account', and mentions sorting by descending start date. The name and description together unambiguously define the tool's purpose, distinguishing it from other Get* sibling 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not indicate prerequisites, when not to use, or suggest other tools for different scenarios. It simply states the basic functionality without context.

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