get_article

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns the full Markdown content and canonical link, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It doesn't contradict them.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The primary action and output are front-loaded, and the input guidance is concise. Every word 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?

For a simple single-parameter read tool with comprehensive annotations, the description covers the return content and input source. No output schema exists, so explaining the return value is necessary and done. Nothing critical is missing.

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 explains that the slug comes from list_articles or search_articles, giving the agent a clear source for the parameter value, which adds meaning beyond the bare 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 clearly states the action (read), the resource (article), and the specific outputs (full Markdown content and canonical link). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on retrieving a single article's content rather than listing or searching.

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 tells the agent to supply the slug returned by list_articles or search_articles, effectively instructing when to use this tool (after obtaining a slug). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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