list_articles

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral details such as newest-first ordering, case-insensitive exact tag filtering, and that only metadata and links are returned.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and every clause adds useful information: source, order, return type, sibling tool, and filter semantics. No redundant text.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, return type, ordering, and filtering. The limit/offset pagination aspects are adequately represented by the input schema, so no critical context 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 adds meaning to the tag parameter by specifying it is optional, case-insensitive, and exact-match, but it does not describe limit and offset. Those are fairly inferable from their names and schema constraints, though not explicitly explained.

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 it lists published articles from a specific blog, newest first, and notes it returns metadata and links. It also differentiates itself from get_article, making its purpose distinct from a sibling tool.

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 gives clear context: use list_articles to browse article metadata, and use get_article to read a full post. It does not explicitly contrast with search_articles, but the usage context is still clear enough for correct selection.

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