articles_list

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint as true/false. The description adds value by stating 'Read-only' and listing the returned fields. No additional behavioral traits (like pagination limits or side effects) are surfaced, but the description aligns with annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences that convey the tool's purpose, fields, filter optionality, and read-only nature. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the 7 parameters (1 required), high schema coverage, and annotations, the description is mostly complete. It lists returned fields despite no output schema. Minor gap: no mention of pagination, but that is acceptable for a basic list tool.

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 high (86%). The description confirms all parameters except site are optional, adding clarity beyond the schema. However, it does not explain parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 lists blog articles on the Voog site and enumerates the simplified fields returned. It unambiguously distinguishes this list operation from sibling tools like article_get or article_create.

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 notes all filters are optional and the operation is read-only, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool.

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