get_solution_articles

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the listing behavior and pagination via the page and per_page parameters, but does not address edge cases like permissions, whether subfolder articles are included, or error conditions. The simplicity of a list operation mitigates this, but more context would be valuable.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a one-sentence summary and a simple argument list. There is no fluff, and each sentence serves a purpose.

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 list tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameters. It could be improved by noting that search_solution_articles exists for search scenarios, but it is generally sufficient for its complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides one-line explanations for all three parameters: folder_id as 'parent folder ID,' and page/per_page as standard pagination controls. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema titles, though the explanations are terse.

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 'List all solution articles in a folder' clearly identifies the action (list), the resource (solution articles), and the scope (within a folder). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_solution_article_by_id (single article) and search_solution_articles (search-based retrieval).

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 the tool is for listing articles in a specific folder, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use search_solution_articles instead. Sibling names provide some differentiation, but explicit guidance is missing.

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